< January 31 | February 2 > |
---|
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:39, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Retarted article my idiot friend made about me- could be speedied, I don't know, I'm just an IP. 164.116.92.162 20:08, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:39, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Foreign language slang dictdef. RickK 00:05, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was IRRELEVANT. This would go on IFD, if the image even existed. dbenbenn | talk 14:23, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I have moved this image by request to the commons under the name Image:IBM PC 5150.jpg, making both Image:5150-1b.jpg and Image:5150-1.jpg obsolete.
See also Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/5150-1b.jpg Boffy b 00:01, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was IRRELEVANT. Images go on IFD, and this image doesn't exist. dbenbenn | talk 14:24, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I have moved this image by request to the commons under the name Image:IBM PC 5150.jpg, making both Image:5150-1b.jpg and Image:5150-1.jpg obsolete.
See also Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/5150-1.jpg Boffy b 00:01, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 14:29, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Advertising for a commercial business school. RickK 00:18, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 14:34, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
No evidence that this is a notable hospital. Cdc 01:37, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:38, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure that this subject is really meaningful. Religious forums are for religion, gardening forums are for gardening, sports forums are for sports. Do we need an article to tell us this? --LeeHunter 01:58, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Postdlf 22:57, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Appeared in one episode of Ren and Stimpy. -- Curps 02:04, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I just happened to find this amidst the shockingly massive amount of work to which this page attests, and my only input in light of how little work i do here, is KEEP because, curps, someone does have the right to hope someone does want to do the plot synopsis, and i happen to be one. I hope the massive amount of work you all do does not tend to push you to delete the work of others when it is actually work. An encyclopedia is everything, in the sense that I think that's what the word means, and I have to keep reading to see how uniform you are in your assessments, but I must point out that to someone who has experienced cartoons for 36 years, even the most minor Ren and Stimpy character is more major than ... well in the interest of encyclopedism, the output a search with a popular file sharing program produced just now (happened to be searching for ren and stimpy, coincidentally, I think), were 3 banned cartoons, all characters owned by AOL. If the other important areas of editorial work here can possibly relate HERE, i think it is in relative freedom for non-evil people to have a forum here for their interests.
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:37, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 14:40, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This is barely a stub, and seems to be more baseless speculation than anything encylopedic. LavosBacons 02:12, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP or MERGE. dbenbenn | talk 14:43, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Doesn't belong here. Bart133 (t) 02:14, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Delete if you so desire , but you are removing the basic description of slope soaring written for newcomers to our hobby , it remains as part of my web page so do as you feel the author SteveW
A reasonable explanation of slope soaring from the RC perspective...it belongs where it is.
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS. dbenbenn | talk 14:47, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable dead witch. Orphaned page. humblefool® 02:28, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Delete. There's nothing notable about this witch or his trial compared to any of the other medieval witch trials. --Angr 07:34, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 14:52, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Short, very little context, no indication of notability. -- Curps 02:30, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:36, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. No consensus to delete or merge. Postdlf 23:07, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
A non-expandable article. JoaoRicardo 02:54, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. Postdlf 23:02, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Vanity -- Chris 73 Talk 04:14, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:36, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Not an encyclopedia article and little potential to become one. Jschwa1 12:35, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was REDIRECT (done by original author during VfD, no opposition). jni 09:16, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
It has been obsoleted through all of the work I have done inChildren of Bodom. There is no need for this article and relatively no way of expanding it much. --Sn0wflake 12:35, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. jni 09:18, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I'm actually from Ohio, and I've never heard of this place. I'm sure it's a great school, but the article fails to distinguish this school from any other Roman Catholic high school. -Aranel ("Sarah") 03:39, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep with a strong recommendation to redirect. Rossami (talk) 02:42, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable. This is a very general term being given a very trivial article. text is: A program register is the program counter in an Artronix PC12. RJFJR 04:32, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Rossami (talk) 02:44, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable. Trivia about semi-notable procesor (PC12). Text is: The central register in the Artronix PC12. The argument always landed on its feet here. see program register and stack pointer. RJFJR 04:44, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:24, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
nn neologism. humblefool® 04:59, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I vote to keep it. --Jino 05:03, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)Jino
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:23, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
An opensource filesharing system that's still in beta with one developer listed on sourceforge. This ain't kazaa, folks. humblefool® 05:23, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:23, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
I can't find any proof on notability on Google; some photo artist on DA comes up higher, and with 56 hits total, well... humblefool® 05:30, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:21, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a collection of links. - UtherSRG 06:40, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
Yes it is
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:21, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable. Not personal vanity, but certainly vanity. RickK 06:50, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was ambiguous. Failing to reach a clear concensus to delete, the decision defaults to keep. Note: There does appear to be concensus that if kept, the article should remain as a redirect. Rossami (talk) 02:48, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I can't imagine there being a need for an article on either the year or the number, and the link to MASH seems tenuous. RickK 07:04, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was ambiguous.
In reviewing the revised article, I conclude that it is still a definition (though significantly improved over the original version. Noting that transwiki does not destroy history and therefore does not require a VfD vote, I am going to be bold and add this to the transwiki queue. Rossami (talk) 02:53, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Dictdef of a slang term. Do they actually use an English abbreviation in Japan? RickK 07:36, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
yes, it is a common term used in news and everyday speech. eg - http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=NEET+Japan
Note to admins: when considering whether this article is to be deleted, please bear in mind that I have just completely re-written it. -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 16:29, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:19, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Student vanity page. Alison Rowe 08:08, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:18, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Ad-speak, probably a copyvio from their website, but I don't care to look because I don't want them to get a chance to actually create a non-copyvio version. This should be deleted as non-notable. Note that it was created by User:VirtualiPhone. RickK 10:11, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Postdlf 23:13, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This has been lingering in CAT:CSD, but is unfortunately not nonsensical enough to be patent nonsense. Zero Google hits. Delete as vanity. jni 10:30, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I think he sounds like the man. you all are just jealous.
(Note: page was blanked by User:212.143.231.118)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 03:42, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Brookie 11:23, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC) Pointless nonsense
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
The result of the debate was merge and redirect. Postdlf 23:21, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Brookie 11:14, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC) No content at all - just rubbish!
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on 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. Carried out by user:Dale Arnett
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete.
I count 29 clear delete votes, 10 clear keep votes (4 of which are discounted as extremely new users who may be sockpuppets), 1 clear keep-as-redirect vote and 3 abstain or ambiguous votes. Note that even if the ambiguous votes are considered as keeps and even if the new users are counted, the vote still reaches a concensus to delete.
Note 2: Based on the general tenor of the comments, the community concensus is that there is not sufficient notability for this slogan to be discussed in a separate article. It may well be appropriate to discuss it in the context of some other article. Rossami (talk) 03:29, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Horrible page title. Duplicates information that is already elsewhere. Neutralitytalk 06:10, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)
The slogan "the foreskin is not a birth defect" asserts the genital integrity position that male genitals of a human being are designed properly and do not usually require genital modification and mutilation or male circumcision of the foreskin of a newborn.
The slogan casts the debate of infant circumcision in terms of personal rights of the man and the rights of him to retain his healthy, living tissues. It implies that the decision about whether to undergo plastic surgery or amputations should be made by the man involved, and should be protected by the United States Constitution under rights to life, liberty, and property, and under the principle of Equal Protection.
The chief argument against this position, as asserted by circumcision advocates, maintains that the choice may be made by doctors or parents to perform genital alterations they might desire or consider healthy. Moreover, for those who consider foreskin to be a birth defect, all reasonable effort ought to be made to sever the organ to make the child match his father.
See also
KEEP!
As of the last version (16:03, 5 Feb 2005), here is a summary of the votes so far:
Deletes (regular)
User:RickK. User:Ambi. User:Rhobite. User:Jayjg. User:Consequencefree. User:Premeditated Chaos. User:Gamaliel. User:Wile E. Heresiarch. User:Asbestos. User:Rossami. User:DJ Clayworth. User:Korath. User:Postdlf. User:Carnildo. User:BM. User:Gazpacho. User:Evil Monkey. User:Cyrius. User:Mackensen. User:Ugen64. User:Edeans. User:Ashley Y. User:Xezbeth.
Deletes (special cases)
User:Neutrality (initial vote page creator). User:Jakew (anti-genital integrity activist). User:Robert the Bruce (anti-genital integrity activist).
Keeps (regular)
User:Exploding Boy. User:Gadfium. User:Scott Gall. User:Megan1967. User:KeithTyler.
Keeps (special cases)
User:DanP (primary author). User:Walabio (genital integrity activist). User:Blackcats (new user). User:Bell Bottom Blues (first ever contribution). "Craig" (first ever contribution).
Redirects
I believe this summary is accurate. - Jakew 19:32, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Following User:Walabio's change (moving User:Robert the Bruce to special cases and adding description), I no longer consider the summary accurate. To my knowledge, Robert has never advocated universal circumcision, nor has he declared an interest on this page. - Jakew 21:30, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC) Additional: Following User:DanBlackham's change (moving myself and identifying me as an "anti-genital integrity activist", I further disclaim the summary. - Jakew 11:06, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Deletes (regular)
Keeps (regular)
Keeps (special cases (new users))
Redirects
I propose that, upon deletion of this article, a new precendent be entered into the record. Apparently, the angry rhetoric from the 'delete' side of this debate deems it important enough to vote on personal whim (some are saying notability is contested, but apparently there is plenty of recognition of the slogan too). Leaving policy justification out of the equation is simply anti-Wikipedia. Therefore, because the attack on this article is unprecedented, I propose adding to Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Precedents the following entry:
Are articles on slogans with fewer than 1000 Google hits permissible? - No, slogans need at least 1000 Google hits
If this precedent existed beforehand, we wouldn't have needed this vote because deletion would be justified. DanP 14:39, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:13, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Posted as a speedy-deletion candidate, which it isn't, so reposting here instead. -- Curps 14:07, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS. dbenbenn | talk 02:43, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Apart from the fact that it is unintelligible, this entry has no merit, and I cannot see anyone adding to it or editing it. The web site link provided is good for a laugh, however -- especially the part about sending your loved ones' remains into outer space. Delete HowardB 14:15, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:07, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was REDIRECT. dbenbenn | talk 02:41, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Made no sense to me. - Mailer Diablo 15:06, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:06, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Band vanity -- Ferkelparade π 15:28, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 03:07, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Votes for deletion is a Votes-over-deletion (VoOD) application with an added value. Here at Votes for deletion, Inc, we believe that the Votes for deletion page can and will replace the older means of page deletion. We have developed a VoOD product to suit the needs of both the home user and the business customer. (Advertising.) / up land 15:43, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 02:39, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:29, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Vanity, doesn't establish notability. --InShaneee 16:22, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 02:37, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The votes were 6 keep, 5 delete.
The coolest thing about this adventure is that anyone can do it, and it only costs 99 cents! All you need is:
* An ice-block * Padded clothes * A hill "
Clearly an olympic sport in the making - still Delete Brookie 20:05, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:31, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
This is non notable in my book - the band name gets 0 google hits as an exact phrase and 22 as inexact ("and" seems to be used rather than "&", so if this is kept I suggest moving to that), of which 9 are unique enough for google to bother with and 2 of those seemed identical to me. All the links were from .de or .ch domains and not in English, my extremely rusty GCSE German was unable to translate sufficiently to make much sense of them. Thryduulf 17:43, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:25, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
High school band. Members Collin Borell and Adam Diotale and related band GrindSkull are also on vfd. Samaritan 18:30, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:25, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Member of high school bands GrindSkull and Green Pool, also on vfd. Samaritan 18:26, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:21, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Member of high school band Green Pool, also on vfd. Samaritan 18:28, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:20, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
High school band. Member Collin Borell, his other band Green Pool, and its member Adam Diotale are all also on vfd. Samaritan 18:34, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:19, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:18, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
This page looks to be an attempt at creating a page about the television show 24 which already exists: 24 (television). Note: I moved this from New Page since "New Page" a previous different article by the same name already has an old vfd page. Paul August ☎ 18:47, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. Postdlf 23:32, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a memorial Uncle G 18:52, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. Postdlf 23:33, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a memorial Uncle G 18:54, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. Postdlf 23:34, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a memorial Uncle G 18:55, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)
Redirect to Columbine High School massacre
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. Postdlf 23:35, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a memorial Uncle G 18:55, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a memorial Uncle G 18:56, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. Postdlf 23:37, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a memorial Uncle G 18:57, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. Postdlf 23:38, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a memorial Uncle G 18:58, 2005 Feb 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 delete. Joyous 02:18, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was ambiguous. No one argued that this article be kept as is. 5 voted for clear delete. 2 voted to redirect. 2 voted merge but there is nothing to merge - which means that the usual argument about "redirect to preserve attribution" doesn't really apply. I am going to exercise my discretion on this one. Delete to clean out the article history then redirect to discourage the recreation of the article. Rossami (talk) 03:42, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a memorial Uncle G 19:16, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete both articles. Joyous 02:17, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
These are two sub-stubs about neologisms. Both were marked for speedy deletion, but I spotted an objection on the talk page of Phun (copied below) so I thought a VfD would be more apropriate. Thryduulf 18:08, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
from Talk:Phun:
this was left unsigned, the history shows it was User:216.37.64.100. This same user created both articles Thryduulf 18:08, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:14, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Otherwise inoffensive essay, but still a statement of unattributed POV. (One unmentioned POV might be that wine should contain a high percentage of alcohol.) No article links to this, so I have no clue why we even need the subject. -- llywrch 19:27, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:09, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Delete as a non-notable album. All information on this page is duplicated on the bands page. Remuel 19:40, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy delete. Joyous 02:09, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
An attempt at humour, but ultimately fails. Possibly a speedy candidate, but I'll put it on here anyway. Xezbeth 19:46, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS Please delete these extra bits when moving this page to the VfD archive.
This discussion has become very long, and is no longer being shown directly on this page in order to improve performance. Please click this link to view or participate in the discussion. Rossami (talk) 00:46, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/One-hit wonders in classical music
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Following the delete, recreated as redirect. Rossami (talk) 03:45, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Another Columbine victim. Wikipedia is not a memorial. -R. fiend 20:11, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Following deletion, recreated as a redirect. Rossami (talk) 03:46, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Older, longer, and more wikipfied than the Columbine victim stubs submitted above, but still much the same. We can't really keep this and delete the others, and wikipedia is not a memorial. -R. fiend 20:17, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Redirect to Columbine High School Massacre. Danielle0386
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was MERGE. dbenbenn | talk 02:21, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Like Kelly Fleming above, a victim of the Columbine shooting. Slightly more worthy of inclusion than the others, as she apparently inspired a made for TV movie. Still, it's a memorial with a sentence tacked on the end, and falls within the memorial guidelines. -R. fiend 20:27, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:08, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
If there's nothing more to be said on the subject, I propose deletion. Deb 20:39, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:08, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Like the Colunbine memorials, only for a survivor, so not exactly a memorial. Stills falls in the same general guidelines, as far as I can tell. -R. fiend 20:41, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:07, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Bassist for the Rock Band Panzerschreck. no evidence given that the band or the bassist are notable. -- Antaeus Feldspar 20:53, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Rossami (talk) 03:55, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
An original-research manifesto or essay, perhaps even a hoax (even if Ambazonia may be real). Even if this was a genuine historical document it would belong in Wikisource, not here, so delete. This same anon vandalized History of Cameroon (not edit war, just blanking). -- Curps 21:15, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:07, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
Campus organization. Article gives no indication that it is more notable than any other campus organization. Isomorphic 21:56, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 02:06, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
An unpassed, non-legislative "sense of the house" resolution. Gazpacho 22:49, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 02:16, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable vanity. Gazpacho 23:01, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.