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

The result of the debate was: Speedily deleted - Mike Rosoft 09:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notice posted on the corridor of the ground floor at Hietalahdenkatu 7A, Helsinki, Finland[edit]

Some local notice paper at an apartment building. Hardly of any interest to anyone outside the local area, but hey, this is an encyclopedia, and it's supposed to note all things in the world and not play elitist games. Besides, what's a couple of extra kilobytes hurting? Weak keep. JIP | Talk 17:10, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, let's write encyclopedic articles. feydey 17:19, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete Wikipedia is most certainly not meant to note all things in the world and this is about as notable as my breakfast this morning. Speedy candidate even?--Kalsermar 17:51, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Move somewhere, uh, maybe Hietalahti, Helsinki >. —Achille 2006-02-05 17:56Z
• Comment: is it really posted directly at the wall, rather than on a board of some kind? In either case, Wikipedia lacks either The wall of the corridor of the ground floor at Hietalahdenkatu 7A, Helsinki, Finland, where the notice on chaining bycycles was posted or The board on the wall of the corridor of the ground floor at Hietalahdenkatu 7A, Helsinki, Finland, where the notice on chaining bycycles was posted. A merge of these important, encyclopedic topics with the article on the corridor of the ground floor at Hietalahdenkatu 7A, Helsinki, Finland would obviously be the correct thing to do in this case. We also lack a List of notices posted in the corridor of the ground floor at Hietalahdenkatu 7A, Helsinki, Finland, in chronological order. (Note that this is not to be counted as any kind of vote.) Tupsharru 18:09, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gee thanks, I nearly choked on my cereal... —Achille 2006-02-05 18:42Z
• Delete Article in its present form is an incitement to bicycle theft. Let's not flout the law here, folks. Dlyons493 Talk 18:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• In response to the above comments, the key virtue of Wikipedia, apart from not having to pay people to insert and edit articles, would have to be inclusivity and scope. Here was the possibility to have an encyclopedia so comprehensive that no other could possibly compete. Even the most obscure facts could be embraced at no cost, apart from a few kilobytes of disk space. This notice in Hietalahti, Helsinki is certainly a very obscure fact and not very notable at all. However, it is a real notice and its existence can be verified simply by visiting the apartment building in Hietalahti. How many people does the notice need to be notable to in order to be included? Comments like "this is about as notable as my breakfast this morning" are spiteful, unnecessary and are simply a case of shooting oneself in the foot, by alienating people. Tragically, it seems that Wikipedia is failing miserably to play to its strengths of immediacy and inclusivity. JIP | Talk 18:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment While I have some sympathy with what's being said, it was fairly clear that this was a test Afd to make a point. The virtue of an encyclopedia is that it can give some context and is not just random data. At this level of detail, too much is less useful than too little (rather like Mark Twains German mapmakers). Dlyons493 Talk 18:20, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Though I live nearby, so I am tempted to go and check out if this information can be independently verified. Weregerbil 18:32, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Non-notable piece of paper. — TheKMan^talk 18:43, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, WP:POINT. — TheKMan^talk 18:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Patently non-notable. Need I say more? --Kinu 18:45, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I find it incredible that even the most inclusive of the inclusive do not have limits. Wikipedia has near one million articles. Do you realize that if this article was deemed legitimate and everyone started following suit we would have 50 million articles just on apartment sign postings? Keep some perspective. The "what I had for breakfast" comment may be sarcastic in tone, but is very appropriate; this is actually just a step up from that level of [non]notability. --Fuhghettaboutit 18:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, non-notable. --NaconKantari e|t||c|m 18:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete: Uh ---- what the hell? —Wknight94 (talk) 19:29, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, JIP created it (apparently against WP:POINT) and brought it here to argue in favor of keeping an article which (s)he nominated for deletion. Article in its present form is an incitement to AfD cynicism and sarcasm. Barno 20:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• BJAODN and delete. I laughed. Snurks ^{T C} 20:49, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. A complete waste of time. Don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. I once did ("List of Disneyworlds in Andorra" if memory is correct) but I know better now. —Sesel 23:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to BJAODN, this is gold! -- Samir |Talk ∙ Contribs | 07:44, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, I didn't realize JIP made it. Now it's not as funny. -- Samir |Talk ∙ Contribs | 07:47, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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