Jump to content

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/archive May 2004

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Votes for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Eloquence (talk | contribs) at 05:15, 7 September 2003 (heterosexual list nonsense removed). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Add links to unwanted page titles to the list below so that other Wikipedians can have a chance to argue for and against the removal of the page. Please sign any suggestion for deletion (use four tildes, ~~~~, to sign with your user name and the current date).

If there is general consensus for deletion, an administrator will carry it out, and the link will be removed from this page (it will show up in the deletion log). If no consensus can be reached, someone will remove the link from this page, and the page will not be deleted.

Page titles should stay listed for a minimum of 7 days before a decision is made. Note that obvious junk can be removed by admins at any time - see deletion policy for details.

Please consider adding a deletion notice like the following on top of pages that are scheduled for deletion:

''This page has been listed on [[Wikipedia:Votes for deletion]]. Please see that page for justifications and discussion.''

You may also choose to inform the author of the page about the ongoing discussion on their user talk page. The notice does not need to be added to pages which a) have no content (such as redirects), and b) also have no significant history.

Please review deletion policy before adding to this page, and before performing deletions as an administrator. To challenge a decision made over a deletion, see Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion.

See also:


September 1

  • Shisha and Hookah seem to be the same things; they should probably be merged into one page. -- Khym Chanur 01:49, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I put this request in Wikipedia:Duplicate articles, they should both be kept, one a redirect to the other, when done. (I prefer Hookah but I suppose it's up to whoever is going to do the work.) - Hephaestos 08:34, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Helicon Systems - stub about a less-than-important company (29 Google hits), but could have some relevance in computer history. Other opinions, please? Kosebamse 07:10, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Doesn't seem to be self-promotion and it is relevant, like you said. Keep it. -- goatasaur 07:22, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Jan Geerinck - Orphan article, seems to be about a webmaster, don't think just to be webmaster is important enough to deserve an article here. andy 08:15, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Pusey House, Oxford - Only one line, which starts with "Pusey House is not..." What on Earth could be the use for that knowledge? It's also an orphan. 141.26.64.2 12:24, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • It sounds like part of an old Harvard witicism, along the lines that the only Presidents of Harvard without a House named after them were President Hoar and President Pusey (with the punchlines of "Whore House" and "Pussy House" remaining unsaid). It was probably funnier when they were an all-boy school, and I don't think Oxford can make that claim. It seems eminently deletable. -- Someone else 04:42, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • It was a lousy article, but Pusey House is real and relatively well-known within a small circle. I've expanded it to what I hope is a minimal effective stub. DJ Clayworth 14:06, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • I would like to discuss Wikipedia:WikiProject Encyclopedic Network. This project strikes me as a weird cross of network theory, machine learning, philosophy and some amount of craziness. Unless user Fwappler can make more clear what he means (with coresponding references to established scientific journals) or a fellow Wikipedian with a better background in mathematics / philosophy can support the feasibility of this project, I tend to see it as a prank that is an embarrassment to Wikipedia and should be removed. Morn 15:06, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • For more of this, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Encyclopedic Network. Looks meta to me, rather than deletable. Martin 16:16, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • Martin, I read all this, and it seems noone is clear what this project is supposed to be about. Noone posted there since the beginning of the year, except for you today, now that I brought up the page here. And the user who initiated the whole thing (whatever it is) seems to be gone since May. Morn 18:56, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • You're right: I didn't spot the date. I won't object to deletion, since the guy's left. Martin 12:21, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Jaeger-LeCoultre Society. Only 15 Google hits. Angela 18:16, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • In addition, appears to be a copyvio: text is exactly as appears here. Furthermore, just below the copied text, the original site lists a 'Betty' as helping; the similarity to the username that created this article here may be significant. -- Morven 19:28, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Copyvio seems unlikely: copyright probably owned by submitting user, or used with permission. However, fails Alexa test - ranked 296,875. Delete. Martin 12:21, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Image:Ds cr.JPG and Curved Ridge - Wikipedia is not a mountaineering guide, and I don't think the personal photo would be appropiate either. andy 18:54, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Maybe Curved Ridge could be moved into a second paragraph under Buachaille Etive Mor. I vote for deleting the image as it contains no encyclopedic value. -- TravelingDude 14:11, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Corentin Louis Kervran and Kervran - says in part: "showed that transmutation of elements does indeed occur in living organisms". This looks like junk science. 4 Google hits for "Corentin Louis Kervran". Kosebamse 20:04, 1 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • If you google for both "Kervran" and "Corentin", not in that particular order, you get a few more. Plus, some of the sites also list the name "C. Louis Kervran". When I tried googling for the sequence c-louis-kervran instead, I got 313 sites. Wiwaxia 04:38, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • But what about the content? Kevran's achievements look like pure crackpottery to me (I've read some more about him at http://www.lasarcyk.de/kervran/index.htm, mostly in German, looks more useful than other sites. There are some more links at http://www.lasarcyk.de/kervran/resonanz.htm). I can't exclude that his research had some value, but it seems to be far from accepted or even widely discussed. Kosebamse 04:58, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • Then why don't we add a few comment that this is work by a scientist which will certainly not be accepted by mainstream science (yet) or something like that?+++
    • This should be deleted or at least heavily modified. Statements like "...which showed that transmutation of elements does indeed occur in living organisms" cause the average layperson reading them to think 'Oh, yeah, OK, so gold turns to silver,' and "...fatal accidents from carbon monoxide poisoning when none was detectable in the air" gets people worrying about dangers they don't really face. It's perfectly plausible to have a person die of CO poisoning and then have it dissipate enough that it's not detectable, especially by the instruments used in the first half of the century. Having an article that contains misinformation, even with a disclaimer that it is not 'widely accepted' runs the risk of misinforming others who do not read the entire article. The first paragraph also depicts the concept as being on the same level as prominent scientific theories -- when it is not. -- TravelingDude 13:59, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)

September 2

  • Momo Taro
    • Currently nothing even remotely useful here. dave 06:03, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • has fact, translation, and link. Keep. Martin 17:34, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • ok fine, although it is pretty sparse. I guess the stub boilerplate will serve that purpose right? dave 00:31, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I am still for deletion. Sub-stub in my opinion. Andre Engels 09:13, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Md. Ahiduzzaman Liton - is already blanked, according to User:Wik it is just patent nonsense. Fails the google test. andy 07:24, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I don't doubt Wiks word when he says it is by a repeat vandal. On the other hand the thing that this particular article fails the google test, is not confirming evidence in my eyes, for the subject is one that would fail the google test, even if legitimate. If it is a vandalism like Wik says (and I believe him), it is of a particularly sneaky type. This vandal deserves special attention, if so. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 07:42, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • I listed it here as it was an orphan to make sure it does not get lost in its current state, but didn't dared to use my sysop powers to delete it right away. Now checking the other contributions from that IP number - they look like valid stuff about Bangladesh (not that I know anything about that country except where it is), so I wonder why Wik wrote it's vandalism. andy 08:03, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • Google does find an Md. Ahiduzzaman of the rice research institute. No idea whether this remark has any use. Andre Engels 11:04, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
        • I don't see why this IP could be considered as a vandal: its contribution about Bangladesh are a bit stubish, but they seem OK. If he's inventing all this must be a sinister character... Muriel Gottrop 11:28, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
          • Although that user did contribute some articles which appear to be factual (e.g. Bogra), he then did some obvious vandalism which you can't see now because it has already been deleted. As to Ahiduzzaman Liton, why would it fail the Google test if it were legitimate? "He masterminded the toppling of Lt. General H. M. Ershad's 9 years' autocratic rule over Bangladesh"? Don't you think it would have been reported in many places if the toppling of Ershad in 1990 was masterminded by a 16-year-old student leader? It is true that student protests played a role in his overthrow, but this name doesn't appear anywhere. He is certainly not "famous" or "known for" anything as the article claims. --Wik 03:54, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Diasystem - self-reflecting definition of the term, I guess it is just nonsense. andy 07:32, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Croatian language links to that page, and in that context the link seems to make sense; however the text would have to be expanded and rewritten to be kept. Kosebamse 09:09, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • Well-see the external link. Mir Harven
  • 2.5G - Should be merged with an article on cell phones.Vancouverguy 23:10, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Against deletion. It's longer than a stub, and a well-defined subject. I see no reason to merge it elsewhere. Andre Engels 07:54, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Also against deletion. 2.5G may be little more than marketing spin in some ways.. but is a well-used term and could exist by itself with a little shaping of the article. Pete 11:21, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)

September 3

  • Homosexual bishop. There is no information on the page as to why the people listed are included on the list, and no information in their respective articles to indicate why they are there. When I raised the question on the talk page, I was informed that I needed to go and either buy a book or find it at the library and correct the page, instead of the people who are responsible for the page actually making it meaningful. RickK 03:16, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Nobody is "responsible" for a page - or rather, everyone is responsible for every page. You wouldn't be the first Wikipedian to visit a library in a bid to improve an article. Martin 09:14, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I'm inclined to see it deleted. There are Popes on the list who are 'alleged' to have had sex with men. If we have allegations they should be NPOV within the individual's article. Putting them in a list format on a page called 'homosexual bishop' seems to give the allegations more weight and provides absolutely no context and does not explain just where the allegation came from or what it is. In addition, even if it is absolutely true that one or more on the list behaved as alleged, that does not necessarily qualify them as a homosexual, such an encounter could mean the individual was a bisexual or an experimenter. So the article shouldn't be specifically homosexual. In addition, these men are primarily known for being Pope, not for being a bishop. So the article shouldn't be titled with the word bishop either. It looks like this one was about the Episcopal Bishop and then go expanded when it probably shouldn't have been. Break it up and put the info in the places it should logically go.Ark30inf 04:31, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I disagree. The subject is valid and should be covered. Just because it is a stub right now is not reason enough to delete it. See the talk page for more information that can be put into the article. --mav 06:25, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I'm not arguing that it shouldn't be covered. I'm arguing that the list of Popes does not belong under homosexual bishop. 1) These men are not best known for being bishops, they are known for being Popes. 2) These are allegations and allegations don't belong on a list, they belong in the subject's individual article where the source, details, evidence, and refutations can be placed. This necessary context cannot be placed in a list. 3) Even if the allegations are absolutely true that does not make them homosexuals in the cultural sense of the word. They might be bisexuals. They might be experimenters. If you put the allegations in the individual Pope's article I have no complaint. If you put them in a list titled List of Popes alleged to have engaged in homsexual behavior then I have no problem because that is accurate. But putting them under homosexual bishop just if flat out not accurate. Leaving the article homosexual bishop does not bother me if you stick only with those who are best known for being bishops and are really actually known to have the sexual orientation in the title (and not just alleged).Ark30inf 07:04, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
All perfectly valid points. I don't disagree. Perhaps a more general article is needed then; homosexual clergy? --mav
The article title is badly chosen but the content is worth keeping. I see no reason for deletion, merely moving. FearÉIREANN 23:37, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
I have no problem if its elements can be moved to the appropriate places.Ark30inf 03:52, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Early grab - Advice on how to do a skateboard trick, Wikipedia is not a skateboard handbook. Basil Fawlty 00:20, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Keep it. Other sports have articles just about specific details of the sport. Skateboarding in no different. Would you also want all the other skateboarding tricks listed in Skateboarding trick deleted as well? -- Popsracer 01:20, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Inclined to keep. Angela 01:22, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Keep it, though, it should be reworded.Vancouverguy 03:45, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Light cone. Currently reads nonsense. "Dryers' first invented the ice cream cone using less dense cream and more milk by products producing a low calorie LITE-CONE." Maybe this page could be turned into a history of the ice cream cone. Here is a site to check for some data. [1] But probably the name of the article should be changed. Rednblu 04:37, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • "light cone", as used in the article that links to light cone, is a concept from physics relating to action-at-a-distance. I'd write something relevant at light cone, but I don't really know enough even for a stub. —Paul A 04:42, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • It is now a proper article. -- Cyan 21:33, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Image:Alexander3ofRussia.JPG. There appears to be questions about the status of this picture as being a photo of Tzar Alexander III of Russia; another image of him has been placed in the article; this may be a photo of him or of Nicholas II, as they were very similar looking Emperors. See Image talk:Alexander3ofRussia.JPG for more discussion. unless it can be positively identified as either Alexander or Nicholas or be deleted. Alex756 06:30, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • It sees that the photo was misidentified in the 19th century book I scanned it from; it seems to be Nicholas II. As we already have a different photo of him and now one of Alexander III, deletion is okay by me. -- Infrogmation 20:38, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)

September 4

  • NeuStar Inc. - Advertisment Basil Fawlty 00:31, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • This is a very significant company, every phone call that terminates in North America and several other places around the world relies on the services this company provide. So they are important enough to deserve an encyclopedia article. -- Popsracer 05:23, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • I certainly agree with Popsracer. It's a shame we ignored the company up until now, to be honest. -- user:zanimum
      • Popsracer's new version looks ok. Andre Engels 09:11, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Keep it. --Zippy 09:58, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • K512. Does this site deserve an article? RickK 03:25, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Vernon J. Setzer - miserably fails the Google test. - Hephaestos 05:58, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • As the one who first suggested it was vandalism, I wholeheartedly agree. Raul654 06:01, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • What about a few other tests -- e.g., no links to this article, no links inside the article, it is difficult to read because it is one long block of text? I may sound like a grouch for bringing these details up, but an article that fails to observe many of the expectations for Wikipedia trips my warning bells. -- llywrch 01:29, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Valakron - hardly of any encyclopedic significance. Kosebamse 06:04, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Just delete it... --Menchi 08:15, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I couldn't find anything in the deletion policy to justify fast-tracking it... but I deleted it anyway. If anyone objects, I will happily undelete it. -- Cyan 22:49, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • How can people (non-sysops) object if they don't know what was on the page? That's the point of VfD - to give them a week to look at it and decide. For those interested, the content was Valakron is the name of the yearbook at Valley High School in New Kensington, Pennsylvania. Volume 36 was published as of 2003.. Angela 23:51, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • The content was listed in the deletion log (complete with wikilinks!?). But I was thinking more of objections like, "Hey! Don't go deleting articles before we non-sysops can look at them, you presumptuous bastard!" I'll be more careful next time. -- Cyan 01:08, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Halfbakery - is this encyclopedic enough to deserve an article of its own? I'm not sure at all. -- Schnee 16:04, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Well, I learned something from the entry, which seems well written enough in itself. I'm for keeping it. -- Smerdis of Tlön 20:48, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Keep it of course. If this article is not encyclopaedic I wonder what qualifies. --KF 21:09, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • I'm just wondering whether each and every community website deserves to have a Wikipedia entry of its own. -- Schnee 13:16, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Alexa test [2] - rank 19,633. Keep? Martin 09:50, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Yes. Keep it. --Zippy 09:56, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • James Deetz - should be either replaced by a real biography or deleted. Morn 18:17, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Judy Resnick - has written a money management book. No content on the page, unimportant person. Morn 18:33, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Yoshikawa Takeo - based on an Angelfire page, which has since been removed for violating the terms of service. Morn 18:48, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Buyer decision processes. Only content is Buyer decision processes classified into the following five steps 1. Problem Recognition  2. Search  3. Alternative Evaluation  4. Choice  5. Outcome. Angela 21:23, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Axe it unless someone creates something better soon. Andre Engels 09:11, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Image:Mt. Vernon.jpg - PD image from a senate website, has been replaced by a photo (taken by myself, Image:Mount Vernon.jpg) which even the original uploader prefers over his upload. So I guess that one can go. andy 21:58, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Why not have both? Martin 10:05, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Smokejumper - personal essay. - Hephaestos 23:02, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Redirected to Firefighter until there is a proper article on it. Angela 23:07, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Doesn't it deserve at least a definition and 'see also' until there is a real article? DJ Clayworth 13:59, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • It does. I just wasn't in the mood for writing one at that point in time. Angela
    • Done. DJ Clayworth 21:08, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Kenneth Richard Norris - well meaning eulogy, but I don't think this Dr. Norris is famous enough to warrant his own article. -- Cyan 23:31, 4 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I disagree. He was an acknowledged expert, widely published in academia. If Cyan's criteria of 'not famous enough' was applied in this case, at least one third of all biographical entries on wiki should be deleted. Norris is exactly the sort of person who should be mentioned in an encyclopædia. The article needs NPOVing but most definitely not deleting. FearÉIREANN 23:30, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • KR Norris was respected throughout the world for his many contributions to agricultural science. However, he was not famous in the Hollywood sense, nor was he an American.
      • I stand corrected. -- Cyan 02:29, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

September 5

  • Paul Watson. Just seems to be a personal attack by User:JasonSpaulding. Angela 02:05, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I think the stub version you had earlier is fine, we just need to keep the POV out of it. - Hephaestos 02:11, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • It might need protecting then as he's added the same (possibly libelous) content four times in the last two days. Angela 02:15, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Center for Mental Health Services and CMHS. I don't know anything about this subject to know if any of this information is correct, but this POV article cannot stand. RickK 02:45, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • VfD is not for listing POV articles. Martin 09:45, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • It is when removing the POV from the article would leave an article that would be a candidate for deletion. In this case I get to "The Center for Mental Health Services is a US government-supported group." as the NPOV core of the article, which is sub-stub in my opinion. Andre Engels 12:06, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • List of religious topics (G-M), List of religious topics (N-S), List of religious topics (T-Z) - I subdivided List of religious topics into 4 chunks a couple weeks ago; this was unnecessary, as the full list (A-Z) is not that long - it just LOOKED long! - so I have recombined them into the one original article. Harris7 05:34, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Hey guys, I'm a new admin...I assume the 3 pages above are candidates for instant deletion, and do not require any lengthy discussion? dave
    • Might as well just redirect them. Martin 09:41, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • That's generally a good idea, but I think in this case, it's not really necessary if there are no links left to the split-up pages. I doubt anyone'll stumble upon them otherwise, especially without coming across the recombined article first. -- Schnee 14:16, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Kathy Watt - I think being the daughter of a semi-famous person (who does not even have a Wikipedia entry yet) does not justify having a Wikipedia entry of one's own. -- Schnee 13:07, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Has been further edited by the same person to tell that she's a cyclist. Andre Engels 21:00, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • The Plug Comic, Chunkee the Monkey, and related - no hits on Google other than ours. - Hephaestos 18:19, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • What about this one, for example? ([3] ) Just search on Google for "plug comic" with the quotes, and you'll get it as the first hit. The article may still have to be deleted, since it seems to be a verbatim copy of that page, but the comic itself seems to have existed. -- Schnee 18:26, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • Thanks for the link. I was concerned due to the vandalism that it might not have been a legit topic, now I know it's legit. - Hephaestos 18:33, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)
        • No problem, you're welcome. :) -- Schnee 00:10, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Chunkee the Monkey gets only 1 Google hit (the one above) that isn't from Wikipedia or a Wikipedia-derived source... I question its continuing presence... :-) Evercat 14:46, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Sir Thomas Browne - a rambling screed whose point, I gather, is that one should not refer to the Jacobean prose writer as "Sir". Any useful material should be integrated into the existing article Thomas Browne. -- llywrch 22:39, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)

September 6

  • Jimmy James and the Blue Flames. See its talk page.
  • Chuo-ku. See its talk page.
  • Higashi-ku. See its talk page.
    • I vote against deletion. They are simply names of place though looking artificial. You cannot translate Tokyo to East City because Tokyo is a name of place. If you think we cannot have disambig page for Chuo-ku then how about Kiyota-ku, Toyohira-ku and other kus? You can tralsnate doesn't mean you should. -- Taku 01:00, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • ZAFT, Coordinators, Earth Alliance. all by same anon. I didn't delete on sight (I'm reformed) in case they made sense to anyone. jimfbleak 07:16, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Also listed at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/copyvio but since rewritten. A suggestion of combining them into the babylon 5 article was met with the response "fuck off Angela". --Angela 07:20, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete. Definitions are nonsense as they stand (there's no context or mention of Babylon 5, and do we really need to create separate entries for each Babylon 5 group?) --Zippy 09:55, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I've made Earth Alliance into a redirect, but this user doesn't deserve much more consideration than that. jimfbleak
    • It shouldn't even be redirected to Babylon 5. As far as I can make out, these entries have no connection with Babylon 5 at all, and it's a completely different fictional Earth Alliance! Delete the lot of them, I say. Arwel 16:42, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Image:Kurt cobain.jpg. As specifically said in Image Talk:Kurt cobain.jpg, this image does not have the appropriate copyright releases to be on Wikipedia. RickK 07:22, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Image:Picture 003.jpg. Extremely large orphan photo. RickK 08:24, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete. It was asked of the user (who had only 2 edits) nearly 2 months ago. What's worse is that it has no desc at all. And a horrible file name. --Menchi 08:41, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • HTML-colour. What is this? No text, and a picture that is too large to fit on the screen. RickK 08:48, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Well what it is; is a colour chart for the some of the various hex colour codes. The reason it's too large to fit on the page is it's really a table not a picture. That could be fixed by making the font smaller. I think it's reasonably useful. The article needs expanding and deo-orphaning rather than deleting Theresa knott 09:04, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Renaming it too would be a good idea. Something like HTML color codes would be nice or even Color in the World Wide Web which would discuss the treatment of colors in the WWW: HTML color codes, the sixteen named colors, the web-safe palette, Windows vs. Mac colors, 8-bit/15-bit/16-bit/24-bit colors, CSS colors, gamma correction (esp. in PNG), colors in popular image formats (GIF, JPG, PNG). Then again, the page might become too long. --seav 11:19, Sep 6, 2003 (UTC)
    • There are already two charts: see List of RGB colours and RGB color space. Both have well-made charts, with different styles. I don't think we need more, just to improve those two. At18 22:19, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • In that case, I'd like to change my mind.Delete. Theresa knott 23:01, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete. And agreed, the List of RBG colours needs some help. -- Wapcaplet 22:33, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • How to answer quizzes. Not really encyclopedic. RickK 08:53, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Maybe merge into Quiz. --Menchi 09:01, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
      • I don't think it's worth merging anywhere. The you are likely to receive partial credit is misleading. You may lose marks for doing this. Not all open ended questions involve writing a "short sentence". Angela 19:05, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Eidolon - Doesn't this belong in a dictionary? Evil saltine 11:52, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Will a merge to a handling of Eidolon Software, a well-known software company for NeXTSTEP and OPENSTEP do? I was unsure. Dysprosia 12:55, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Liquid2k. Content is Liquid2k is the name of a free web host. I don't think it's a good idea to start listing every web host. Angela 22:39, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Chip Row. Every town has one of these. I can't see any value in keeping an article about Cardiff's one. Angela 22:43, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Maybe UK towns have these, but US towns don't. It is a useful entry for defining what a "Chip Row" is, even if it needs to be made more general.-BuddhaInside
  • User:Lir I dont see any point in keeping this userpage any more, since the user in question has long since been banned, and has not made any contributions since last November. G-Man 23:09, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Has not made any contributions under that username since last November. Nevertheless I concur. - Hephaestos 23:11, 6 Sep 2003 (UTC)

September 7

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/archive_May_2004&oldid=1403987"