Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Houseoffusion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 23:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
advert Yy-bo 00:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Rama's arrow 01:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
SpeedyDelete as spam. --Dennis The TIger 02:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Note, retracted Speedy. Didn't know that spam is not warrantable for speedy delete. --Dennis The TIger 02:05, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete— Wikipedia articles are not advertisements is an official policy of long standing. And even if rewritten, it probably will not meet WP:CORP. Williamborg (Bill) 02:45, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete -- This article is spam vandalism, and qualifies for speedy deletion under CSD G3. John254 03:22, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. This is spam. It appears wriiten just to promote this business. -- 24.20.69.240 09:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, blatant advertising. Particularly note how it has about twenty categories, most of which don't exist. JIP | Talk 11:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Those, the fact that it contains contact information, the fact that it uses a non-existent {{Domain Page}} template, and the fact that it uses <WikiPages />, <graphic />, <reviews />, <vote />, and <thumbnail /> markup elements, none of which have any meaning here, make me suspect that it was meant for another project, not Wikipedia, and was submitted here as a simple mistake rather than as an attempt at advertising. I have no idea which project, though. Delete. Uncle G 14:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Can be re-created if it becomes more noteable. In this bad layout argumentation was simply advert, as sufficient for afd nomination. User:Yy-bo 15:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Those, the fact that it contains contact information, the fact that it uses a non-existent {{Domain Page}} template, and the fact that it uses <WikiPages />, <graphic />, <reviews />, <vote />, and <thumbnail /> markup elements, none of which have any meaning here, make me suspect that it was meant for another project, not Wikipedia, and was submitted here as a simple mistake rather than as an attempt at advertising. I have no idea which project, though. Delete. Uncle G 14:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Even ignoring the charges of spam, this article is poorly written and does nothing to demonstrate the notability of its subject. Heimstern Läufer 20:45, 9 September 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.