< February 1 | February 3 > |
---|
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE (5 delete, 1 neutral/merge, 1 keep). jni 09:39, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
A complete and utter nonesence, badly written by an anon, as far as I can tell. Linked only from an ambigous 'see also' at Slavic mythology. The unused redirects Thresholds (Polish mythology) and Threshold (Polish mythology) should go as well.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 23:45, 2 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. jni 09:33, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Doesn't seem like a significant restaurant. Not much info there except that they make good food. Elf | Talk 00:37, 2 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. jni 09:34, 10 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 ambiguous.
I count 9 votes to delete and 5 to keep. This is a clear majority but not the overwhelming majority generally required to establish evidence of concensus. In reviewing the article, I found that the link to the professor's home page) is not working, undermining the ability of readers to verify elements of the article. In reviewing the arguments presented below, I note that the "keep" votes for the most part simply stated "published author". From available evidence, policy statements and an extensive study of our precedents, I do not believe that the general community concensus supports such a low standard for inclusion in Wikipedia.
After a great deal of consideration, I am going to exercise my discretion and delete the article. Rossami (talk) 03:46, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable professor. One wonders if the poster is one of his English students. RickK 00:45, Feb 2, 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 SPEEDIED. dbenbenn | talk 00:01, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The bits that establish alleged notability are inherently unverifiable. --fvw* 01:06, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
And I've re-deleted it. Future histories are inherently nonsense and therefore valid speedy deletes. RickK 06:02, Feb 2, 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 REDIRECTED. dbenbenn | talk 23:57, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Unnecessary disambig page. Is anyone really going to search for this exact term? -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 01:29, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Case closed. I made it into a redirect to Papal regalia and insignia, which actually makes much more sense about papal hats than the two separate articles (Mitre is actually an episcopal hat). Mikkalai 00:41, 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. jni 14:34, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable web comic [1] --LeeHunter 01:34, 2 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. jni 14:35, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Neologism, dicdef. -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 02:57, 2 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 23:43, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable. RickK 00:37, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
John O'Hart is one of the most famous genealogist of all time. And as the creator and primary editor of this article I resent any attempt at deletion. [--Wikibancroft63]
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. jni 08:58, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Not a speedy delete candidate, but a substub at best. Delete unless expanded.-gadfium 03:24, 2 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. Delete 9 / Keep 5 -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:36, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I think the need is better served by the Category:High schools in the United States and subcategories of that, although they of course won't list schools we don't have an article about. There are a number of similar articles, see High schools in the United States, which was also listed for speedy. No vote.-gadfium 03:34, 2 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 23:24, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Nothing in this article worth keeping. Not notable. --Spinboy 04:04, 2 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. jni 14:38, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Something which doesn't exist yet is usually unencyclopedic. -- Curps 04:23, 2 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. jni 14:39, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Looks like a vanity page. About a hundred Google hits on the name, but most are for a pilot, a golfer, and a brewer. I haven't found a single reference to Bill DaSilva as a musician. LizardWizard 04:31, Feb 2, 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. jni 14:40, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
There's no evidence that the Internet message board where this guy apparently po'ed someone enough to make this entry for him is notable, let alone one poster who, as the entry tells us, has "faded into obscurity". Let's let the article go the same way. -- Antaeus Feldspar 04:31, 2 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. jni 14:43, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Nonexistent and implausible worm. No Google hits. --Goobergunch|? 05:23, 2 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 DELETED. dbenbenn | talk 23:19, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Not encyclopedic. Dump of HTML-formatted transcript of a debate. Available elsewhere on the web. 209.188.109.56 05:40, 2 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 REDIRECTED. dbenbenn | talk 23:20, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
BJAODN. RickK 05:56, Feb 2, 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 23:15, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Somebody ranting. -- Curps 06:03, 2 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.
One vote to "merge" was ignored, as you can't merge to a red link. Of course, anyone who wants to move or merge this article is free to. dbenbenn | talk 22:57, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Sure, it might look clean, but wait till you actually start reading it. It becomes nonsense really fast. humblefool® 06:08, 2 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 2 / Delete 2. No consensus...keep. -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:39, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
No-budget film. 10 votes on imdb.. Wouldn't even consider it a B-movie. Xezbeth 06:13, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Not notable enough to rise to the level of an encyclopedia. Katefan0 19:53, Feb 3, 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 22:45, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The contents of the deletion debate have been removed as they relate to a living person. A record of the deletion debate can be found in the deletion history.
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 22:30, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
see also Kent Brewster
Doesn't seem very notable, probably vanity. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 06:12, 2 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 22:25, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
see also Speculations
Doesn't seem very notable, probably vanity. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 06:12, 2 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. (No consensus - Keep 3 / Delete 5) -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:42, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Played "Solicitor in car" in Mystic River.. and in a no-budget film. Un-notable. Xezbeth 06:22, Feb 2, 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. jni 09:00, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Obvious vanity. --Slowking Man 06:31, Feb 2, 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 SPEEDIED. dbenbenn | talk 00:29, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Star Wars: Uprising MUSH (SWU) is a Star Wars-themed MUSH (Multi-User Shared Hallucination) starts this article, written by somebody who, er, claims to be the creator of Star Wars (:) Uprising MUSH. To me, it sounds less unappealing than does the Multi-Couch-Potato Shared Hallucination of the commercial product, but I don't suppose this counts. (After all, we must genuflect to the media moguls, and keep spending.) Vanity starwarscruft. -- Hoary 09:27, 2005 Feb 2 (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 00:27, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Not noteworthy. Doesn't seem that he'll be encyclopedic. Dismas 14:30, 2 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. jni 09:06, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
An attempt to derive a neologism from the name of a character in a video game. On a cursory search, no Google hits were found that weren't related to the video game itself. Uncle G 18:24, 2005 Feb 2 (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. jni 09:03, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I just keep thinking of that beer commercial. "Wazaaah!" Uncle G 18:37, 2005 Feb 2 (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. jni 09:01, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
An anon copied this information from the Bharrat Jagdeo page and created this page. (The anon also added Shivrajan Ramgopaulsingh as the current President of Guyana on the Guyana page). Nonsense page. Guettarda 19:11, 2 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. -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:52, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The page contains a short piece of text that is merely a (poorly-written) definition of Ethnocentrism, with “Chinese” inserted. No reason is offered for thinking that there's anything significant about Chinese ethnocentrism, or anything that isn't covered on the main ethnocentrism page. I've tried a couple of times to delete it and make it a redirect page, but my edit has been reverted, both times by people active in the Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Jewish ethnocentrism debate, one giving no reason, the other leaving a message on my Talk page labelling me “left wing”. (Update, 3rd Feb. 05: the same user, User:Jacquerie27, after pestering me on my Talk page, started looking up the articles I've started, combing them for minor, often imagined errors of grammar, sometimes leaving snide messages about me on the relvant Talk pages (see Churchill, Oxfordshire & Bachelor of Philosophy). Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:38, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC))
My suggestion is that the page be deleted (as it has no content that needs to be merged) and turned into a redirect page. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:35, 2 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. (No consensus: Keep 9 / Delete 11) -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:53, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The start of a list of high schools, it is actually a list of state-level lists, which I'm also proposing for deletion. This is clearly what categories are for. --BM 19:14, 2 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. Delete 10 / Keep 7 -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:05, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
A series of similar lists, all being proposed for deletion at this time. This is what categories are for. --BM 19:18, 2 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.
The votes were 8 delete, 4 keep. dbenbenn | talk 14:30, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
One in a series. This is what categories are for. --BM 19:41, 2 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. dbenbenn | talk 15:12, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Another article with a weird POV title created by a Shi'a apologist apparently to post anti-Sunni Shi'a polemics OneGuy 19:42, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep - OneGuy is on a rampage deleting everything i do and write.
The Topic is important, it reflects one major muslims, Alis, feelings toward a important event. It is to long to fitt in a biograpy and since its a "hot" topic, it needs ample referense to prove its validity, something i have included. If OneGuy's problem is that he thinks its not NPOV, then he should address it, preferably with proof, not voting for deletion only because it dosent suite his image of what Ali felt and did. In short: Ali DID opposed Abu Bakr, as is evident in authentic Sunni sources i quoted and its important for understanding the difrent event that emerged from that moment. If OneGuy has a problem with the title, i would have no problem renaming it to "What Ali sought of the first Kalif" or somthing similar.
I challenge OneGuy to bring ONE hadith that shows that Ali supported Abu Bakrs nomination for Khilafa. (unsigned comment by Striver)
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. I count 8 clear "delete" votes, 4 clear "keep" votes and one "move". Failing to reach a clear concensus to delete, the article is kept for now. Rossami (talk) 23:25, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
One in a series. This is what categories are for. --BM 19:33, 2 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 ambiguous. I count 7 clear "delete" votes, 3 clear "keep" votes and one "move". Failing to reach a clear concensus to delete, the article is kept for now. Rossami (talk) 23:35, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
One in a series. This is what categories are for. --BM 19:29, 2 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. -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:08, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
"actress" with one role in an unreleased film. Gained some very limited fame by appearing on IMDb's 'Fresh Faces'. Her career has the potential to take off, but it hasn't yet. Xezbeth 19:59, Feb 2, 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. -- AllyUnion (talk) 11:15, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Vanity substub in broken English. —Korath (Talk) 20:39, Feb 2, 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. jni 14:53, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This isn't an encyclopedia article; it's kind of an essay or outline, flush with opinion, conversational tone (addressing the reader as "you"), and how-to or advice.
What facts it does present are redundant with encyclopedia articles such as Electronic mail, E-mail spam, and DNSBL. These facts are better presented in those articles, so further merging is not necessary.
This article is also only linked (as a "related topic") from one article -- E-mail spam, mentioned above. --FOo 20:44, 2 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 DELETED. dbenbenn | talk 00:15, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Chain-letter e-mail joke, possibly a copyvio, unencyclopedic. -- Curps 20:25, 2 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. jni 14:47, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
According to the article, this 18 yr old is a prominent member of the British Conservative Party. The article doesn't specify his role and I can't seem to find anything by Googling. --Lee Hunter 21:11, 2 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 DELETED. dbenbenn | talk 00:12, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable minor character. Sc147 23:21, 2 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. jni 13:18, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Non-notable blog. Alexa rank is 2,873,985; google for "A Little About Everything" (with quotes) doesn't find this until the third page. Orphaned article. — Gwalla | Talk 00:14, 3 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.