Jump to content

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/archive September 2004

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If you want to nominate an article for deletion, please read this carefully first.

If the latest nominations appear to be missing from this page, please purge the cache.

Articles for Deletion (AfD) is where Wikipedians decide what should be done with an article. Items sent here usually wait seven days or so; afterward the following actions can be taken on an article as a result of community consensus:

More information.

Things to consider:

  • It is important to read and understand the Wikipedia deletion policy which states which problems form valid grounds for deletion before adding comments to this page.
  • Use the "what links here" link which appears in the sidebar of the actual article page, to get a sense how the page is being used and referenced within Wikipedia.
  • Please familiarize yourself with some frequently cited guidelines, in particular WP:BIO, WP:FICT, WP:MUSIC and WP:COI.

AfD etiquette:

  • Please be familiar with the policies of not biting the newcomers, Wikiquette, no personal attacks, and civility before adding a comment.
  • Sign any listing or vote you add, by adding this after your comment: ~~~~.
  • If you are the primary author or otherwise have a vested interest in the article, say so openly, clearly base your vote on the deletion policy, and vote only once, like everyone else.
  • Your opinion will be given the most weight if you are logged in with an account that already existed when the nomination was made. Anonymous and new users are welcome to contribute to the discussion, but their votes may be discounted, especially if they seem to be made in bad faith.
  • Please vote only once. If there is evidence that someone is using sock puppets (multiple accounts belonging to the same person) to vote more than once, those votes will not be counted.

You can add each AFD subpage day to your watchlist by clicking this link: Add today's AFD to watchlist

See also Guide to deletion | Alternative outlets | Undeletion policy | Deletion guidelines for admins | Deletion process
Archived delete debates | Speedy deletion policy | Category:Pages for discussion


17th 16th 15th 14th 13th 12th - 11th 10th 9th 8th 6th 5th 4th 3rd


Template:VfD frontmatter

VfD was archived on 28 May. If you need to look at old history please see the history of Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion_archive_May_2004.

Decisions in progress

Note that listings more than five days old should now be moved to Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Old.




June 12

Stain Internet Cafe — Discussion

Update: I count 7 votes to delete and 3 to keep. I'll now delete Stain Internet Cafe. -- Wile E. Heresiarch 07:40, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Advertisement for a minor company; goes as far as to list prices. A line like "The cafe features local artwork at the behest of Pascal Osti, but he doesn't want to stop locally" suggests that this was written by Osti himself. Bamos 01:39, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Well, it's not an advertisement. I wrote it, and my name is Marlowe Revilla, I've prevented creating a user login because it is frowned upon where I am right now. I used to go there and thought if anyone was searching for an example of an internet cafe this would be a good one. I can remove the prices if it really offends you so much.

Still a no go hey? Okay, well, I guess I'll just bite the bullet and create a user. Could you maybe post a link to a wikipage that has a list of rules for good site contributions?

  • Sounds like an interesting place, but if that article was allowed, it would be a slippery slope letting everyone advertise in the Wikipedia. That's really the main reason articles like that are taboo. You might want to check out How to write a great article and Wikipedia:Style and How-to Directory. You write well and seem to have handled this experience quite well. I hope you do continue to contribute and I hope to see you around the Wikipedia. SWAdair | Talk 03:52, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep this is one of the big internet cafes in Victoria where I live. Burgundavia 07:35, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not encyclopedic. Wyllium 12:38, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete EddEdmondson 12:42, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete unless the original poster or someone else removes the puffery and admiring comments and makes it a truly NPOV description, in which case I would probably be inclined to change my vote to Keep. Addendum, I also think the article name should be changed to Stain Internet Cafe (Victoria, BC) and Stain Internet Cafe made a redirect, both to be more informative and for possible future disambig, in case there are or may be others.
  • Keep and improve, interesting as example of an internet cafe, or move bits in generalized form to Internet cafe.--Patrick 15:28, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep gets my vote. The guy who wrote the article is obviously a genius and deserves recognition for his work. --Marlowe 00:05, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
    • This comment was made by Destinova who claims the page as his own contribution. For future reference, trying to call yourself a genius generally makes you look like a fool. -- Cyrius|✎ 05:09, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, there's nothing seperating this from the masses of other internet cafes. -- Cyrius|✎ 05:09, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Ha, I forgot to put my timestamp on that comment there. I'm a relatively new user and this has been known to happen with just about all the comments I've made anywhere on Wikipedia. However, I believe you are quite wrong in your observation, sir. Not to argue semantics, but I wasn't trying to call myself a genius. I did call myself a genius. The reason, most obviously lost on a humourless goit like yourself, was to add a certain levity to the situation in which I was felt some levity was needed. I have been corrected in my err and was performing a jest to draw attention away from the fact that I made that site (which I now know I shouldn't have) in the first. Now, not quite sure if it was merely because I forgot my timestamp or because you like making piss-poor observations where they are very unwelcome and extremely unwarrented, but it would be appreciated if you keep your pithy, obnoxious and poorly-written tripe to yourself. If you're unaware how, try searching yourself as a user and clicking "discussion" whereupon you can make as many dim-witted comments as you want. --Marlowe 00:05, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)

EDIT: Damn, I forgot the timestamp again. --Marlowe 00:05, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)

    • Actually, you originally called yourself a "genious", my apologies for not getting that right. If you think referring to yourself as a genius is funny, then I suggest that you refrain from calling other people's senses of humor into question. -- Cyrius|✎ 00:17, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Heh, so, let's be clear on this, just for my benefit. You placate and insult me and now you're arguing me something I'm not arguing (what I originally wrote), and just for good measure you throw in one last insult and tell me not to bring your poor sense of humour into this? Any unbiased observer will remark that you're in the wrong. I did nothing to warrent your hurtful comments. I'm not looking for an apology however, so lets just end this before your preaching of foolish behavior makes you look any more foolish. --Marlowe 03:11, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. There's already a decent article on internet cafes out there. I'm not sure we need an entry on every single one individually. Joyous 19:52, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: nonnotable. Wile E. Heresiarch 03:59, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

W1k1p3d14 — Discussion

  • Uneccessary stub. Rhymeless 03:05, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. This doesn't seem to have the potential to become an encyclopaedic article. Acegikmo1 03:18, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Personal neologism dicdef, and it's just lame. Delete. -- Cyrius|✎ 03:51, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Duh l33t. SWAdair | Talk 03:59, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Redirected to Wikipedia. Guanaco 20:12, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • but its too good for toilet paper! (vote affirmative to delete)Dominick 02:35, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. What's next? l33t Klingon titles? - Centrx 21:48, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. There's too much 1337-speak in the world already :D --212.120.126.4 17:04, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. -- pne 14:48, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Miriam Parrish — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Miriam Parrish

Synthesis:PokemonAttack — Discussion

  • By same author as W1k1p3d14 above, with about the same chance of viability, IMHO. Niteowlneils 03:31, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • If anyone finds anything to redirect and move the info to keep, (I personally have no idea what this "move" is from), otherwise delete siroxo 12:17, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)

Chaz And Daz and PentaKackle Animation — Discussion

  • "Chaz And Daz" gets 2 google hits, "PentaKackle Animation" gets 1 google hit. The hit counter on the "Chaz and Daz" webpage is 297 as of writing this. Maximus Rex 06:10, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete vanity page. Meelar 20:09, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Church rank — Discussion

From VfD

All important information is already contained within Roman Catholic Church. A seperate article isn't really necessary, so delete. PMC 06:55, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Keep - either redirect to Roman Catholic Church, or better still add info on other churches, either way there is no need to delete the article. theresa knott 22:34, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)


It would be interesting to see rankings in other churches for comparison . eg Greek Orthodox, Angican, Lutheran, Methodist etc Lumos3 22:07, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

This article should be deleted, it contains numerous gross errors which would make it very difficult to amend. It is irresponsible to leave this posting in place. It reads as if someone who knows "something" -- but not much -- wrote this off the top of his/her head. Furthermore, "rank" is not a term that is used formally within the Catholic Church. The author is looking to make distinctions and classifications which the Catholic Church does not make in terms of "rank." Furthermore, the sacramental order (deacon, priest, bishop) should be distinguished from the honorific/jurisdictional (monsignor, archbishop, cardinal, pope).Michael Rosinski, SJ 23:11, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This page is extremely redundant and since three people on the talk page want it deleted Ive gone ahead an nominated it for deletion, --Riconoen 10:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Harvard National Model United Nations — add to this discussion

Much of what could go here (point of such a conference, rules of procedure, etc.) should be in Model United Nations. I'll try to fix that page up when I have time. Telso 00:23, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

From VfD:

Harvard National Model United Nations

Advertisement for school club. Possibly copyvio, but passes google test. --Jiang 21:25, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Sitting on the fence on this one. I fondly remember my days in the Model United Nations. If this particular one actually is "the oldest, largest, and most prestigious simulation of its kind," I could see it being notable enough to keep. At the very least, though, that last sentence ("This year...") has to go. No vote. SWAdair | Talk 08:10, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I tried to overhaul this up but there may not be that much to say and I'm not that great a writer to begin with. I'll leave voting to others who are probably less biased than I am. Telso 00:17, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. The new info added by Telso convinced me. Definitely notable. SWAdair | Talk 23:22, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, assuming no copyvios & some sp/ed following. Denni 05:07, 2004 Jun 14 (UTC)
  • Keep. It was a copyvio from the official site, but Telso's edits have both corrected that and made it a very worthy article. Acegikmo1 00:10, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Whatever it was originally it's worth keeping now. JCarriker 04:04, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

  • It would be much appreciated if people could fill in the list of previous winners, as a quick google search cannot find such information. It would also give a better feel for the event and its credibility, since the winners are typically prestigious colleges. LostLeviathan 03:11, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Reichsfolk — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Reichsfolk

Cessna 182 — Discussion

Power plant

Which motor used in c- 182 2402:8100:3949:8DFC:3218:6C46:FF47:FAF0 (talk) 08:12, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As the article states, early models were powered by a Continental O-470. Starting with the T182R, it was powered by a Lycoming O-540. Some specialized variants also had different engines, such as the J182T with a SMA SR305-230 diesel engine. - ZLEA T\C 15:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of credit unions — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of credit unions

Criminal Procedure Code of Japan — Discussion

  • Self-referential and counter productive (would be better if there was no stub). Amusing page history though :) Telso 07:44, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. There may be a germ of fact in here, but if so the author is going to have to provide more detail; current version can't be cleaned up. JamesMLane 07:35, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

SDC Buggy — Discussion

  • Carnegie Mellon University's Buggy race might just make the cut, but one of the teams? Gimme a break. Delete, vanity. -- Jmabel 08:54, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete vanity. -- Cyrius|✎ 18:14, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Chute — Discussion

Chute (gravity)

The article refers too briefly to Escape Chutes. This product has become popular in a version that incorporates a spiral slide inside the main sleeve. The designer and manufacturer is Axel Thoms of Germany. URL: www.axel.thoms@t-online.de Designed for 2.75m to 112m and can be engineered for longer lengths on request.

Marketing is worldwide and very popular in Europe, Midele East, Far East, and South America. Recently introduced in India, and Indonesia.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chute (gravity). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:28, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chute (gravity). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:11, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Goust story probably not true

The story on this page about the hamlet of Goust using a gravity chute to transport coffins is extremely dubious. I've added a CN tag, and followed up with the editor who added it, but if it's still unsourced in a few days from now I'd recommend deleting it. 185.37.136.73 (talk) 19:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Buggy race — add to this discussion

  • I'd delete on general principles to discourage this multi-article spam on something so trivial. -- Jmabel 08:59, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete all the Buggy-related articles you listed. There's a paragraph on it in Carnegie Mellon University which contains all the information from all of the articles and more besides - I think that's all we need. --Stormie 10:54, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
    • Agreed, could certainly redirect though -- siroxo 12:22, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
    • Redirect to Carnegie Mellon University#Buggy races. Rossami 13:22, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
      • Perfect, I didn't realize you could redirect to sections! siroxo 14:26, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
        • Last I checked, you can't. -- Cyrius|✎ 17:56, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
        • Under this version of the software, typing in a redirect to a section has the effect of a redirect to the top of the page. I've been optimistically putting in redirects to sections in the hope that someone will make the feature work soon (and because there is no harm in the meantime). Rossami 23:32, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
          • The section redirect works for me, thought you'd like to know (; -- siroxo 15:03, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • Added VFD notice, which was missing. No vote. DJ Clayworth 19:22, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Trivia, delete. ping 08:26, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Steuard Jensen — Discussion

  • Looks like vanity to me. -- Jmabel 09:01, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. --Stormie 10:52, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
  • I've heard of him. I'd be surprised if he wrote it himself. Probably not notable enough to keep though. Morwen - Talk 12:42, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Someone who created an FAQ, not notable, delete. Question: How do people that apparently have the capacity to be at university think that articles like this belong in an encyclopedia? Wyllium 12:45, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I tenatively vote to keep. I know this seems like a stupid decision, but it may very well be that he is at the academic forefront when it concerns the analysis and commentary of his subject; possibly the most influential in its genre. I wonder if this topic would have been recieved differently had the movies not been made. However, I think it does need cleanup. Rhymeless 01:28, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: personal promotion. No evidence that he is notable in his technical field. A graduate student who likes Tolkien -- so what? Wile E. Heresiarch 04:02, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • For the record, I had no idea that any article about me had been added to Wikipedia (apart from my own user page here, anyway). Is there any way for me to find out what the heck was in the article in question? In any case, I would be the first to agree that I don't deserve a Wikipedia entry. Delete. (Yes, I know the decision has already been made, and that I may not even be eligible to vote on such things at this point, but I want to emphasize that whatever the page may have been, it wasn't "vanity".)--Steuard 18:43, Jul 9, 2004 (UTC)

RPM Live Linux CD — Discussion

  • Maybe belongs on OpenFacts, but seems wrong for Wikipedia: not significant enough. -- Jmabel 09:33, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
  • Propose moving some of the more useful facts to Fedora Core under "versions" heading, and redirecting -- siroxo 12:21, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, move facts to its section in LiveCD. While valid, this doesn't merit a whole article. Rossumcapek 18:58, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Interesting project but not notable. Wile E. Heresiarch 00:57, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Discussion now closed. Consensus to delete (3 for deletion, 1 for redirection). DJ Clayworth 16:14, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipolice — add to this discussion

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled Wikipedia:Wikipolice.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the article.

  • This article still has a VfD tag on it but the discussion appears to have been moved to Wikipedia:Archived delete debates/June 9. If the deletion debate is still ongoing, I definitely vote for its deletion; it appears to be a fact-free rant or at best an extended troll from an embittered ex-editor (at least, Irismeister says he's now an ex-editor). There may be a place for an article on the sociology of Wikipedia but this ain't it. -- ChrisO 12:40, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Agree with ChrisO. There seemed to be consensus to delete, and if not there should at least be a prominent link to the archived discussion in the article talk page, and of course removal of the VfD tag. Andrewa 15:07, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • It was unlisted by Wile E. Heresiarch from VfD/Old with the edit summary "Wikipolice -: unlist, deleted some days ago". I think he saw the main namespace redirect had been deleted and assumed someone had speedy deleted the actual page. -- Cyrius|✎ 17:55, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I have deleted it and the two images uploaded to illustrate it. There was a consensus to delete it at Wikipedia:Archived delete debates/June 9. Guanaco 19:03, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • It's just been re-created. Andy Mabbett 21:55, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue or the deletion should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

Michael Angelo Benedetti, False pride — add to this discussion

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the pages entitled Michael Angelo Benedetti and False pride. This page is kept as an historic record. The result of the debate was to delete the articles.

  • Looks like a vanity page. No google hits for "Michael Angelo Benedetti". There are a number of other edits made by the same user relating to the same person :[1]. Thue 17:51, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, and delete False pride as well. User overwrote Dreams Come True, which was a stub about a Japanese band, to promote himself. -- Cyrius|✎ 18:10, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, looks like a vanity page to me. StuartH 04:32, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I agree, Delete it
  • it was funny for a day but should be gone now
  • Could it be the author had the pianist Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli in mind??

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue or the deletion should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

Binary tree (poetry) — Discussion

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled Binary tree (poetry).

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the article.

  • Idiosyncratic. Original research. Pointer to a geocities site. Self-promotion?
  • Delete: The article describes a real poetic structure, but not a real poetic form that I've ever heard of by that name. It could be novel or idiosyncratic. Had the author cited a example poems, listed authors who have used it, referred to a poetic lexicon, it might have been different, but a flat assertion that this is a form, when, if it is, it's so rare as to have escaped the Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics? Geogre 19:04, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. http://www.geocities.com/binarytreepoem/ describes it as "an attempt to create an experimental poetic form." That, to me, says clearly that it is not a recognized poetic form yet, therefore unencyclopedic, original research, etc. The article can be reinserted someday when clear evidence can be presented that the experiment has succeeded, and that the poetic form is catching on. Dpbsmith 21:08, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue or the deletion should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

SymmyS — Discussion

  • Idiosyncatic. Original research. Pointer to website. Self-promotion?
  • Delete - advert/vanity - example: "See http://tommyrot.arrr.net for the symmys home page and a detailed explanation of SymmyS rules and examples." - Tεxτurε 18:56, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Fair enough. This was one of the first pages I created, before I got to understand the culture here... as much as I like to think SymmyS deserves an entry, it's not far off the mark to call is a vanity page. There are only two or three people in the world who've ever written SymmyS, and I'm the only person to publish any. Tom 19:10, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • Well, no hard feelings. Thanks for all your other work--we appreciate it. Meelar 20:06, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Manipulative therapy — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Manipulative therapy

Growgame — Discussion

A flash game. The current article version is 1) In Danish 2) Just a game walkthrough. No encyclopedic content. Thue 20:40, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • As the other language marker was only just added, I vote we wait a week or two to see if it does get translated and then delete it (if not). (If I get time, I might do it, as I have extensively played the game it is talking about) - Xgkkp 20:34, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • I just used a few moments to translate it after listing it here. As you can see (now) it needs a rewrite. Thue 20:54, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - I liked the game so much I improved the article. Check out the other game: Tontie - whack-a-mole with power-ups. - Tεxτurε 21:00, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • You have just been responsible for me not editing wikipedia for 30 minuttes :). The growgame article still needs to describe why it is not just another random flash game. Thue 21:26, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • As cute a little game as it is, I cannot think of a single reason why it should merit a place in Wikipedia, unless we're also saving gum wrappers and dryer lint. Denni☯ 02:31, 2004 Jun 16 (UTC)
  • Delete: not notable. Wile E. Heresiarch 00:36, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Billboards of Lahore and Homes of Lahore — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Billboards of Lahore

Jules Ismail — Discussion

  • 9 hits for "Jules Ismail", 29 for kwestpets, none for "Another disk, another day". allmusic.com hasn't heard of him. Some admins would probably consider this a speedy candidate, but since I haven't been an admin very long, I figured I'd err on the side of caution. Niteowlneils 22:33, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, though you didn't go wrong listing it here. Meelar 22:39, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Looks like some sort of anti-vanity page. Delete. -- Cyrius|✎ 04:08, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I disagree.

June 13

Peter Harrison — add to this discussion

  • In this article, created by User:209.96.179.26, there is no evidence supporting the claim that Harrison started his architectural training at age 12 at the hands of William Etty. Etty was an artist, not an architect. There are many odd claims, unsubstantiated, such as Harrison being largely responsible for America speaking English today and for India remaining in the British fold for 200 more years. I believe this is a deliberate hoax, with the perpetrator taking some facts and expanding them with imagination and myths. See 1. It seems to be the work of the same person responsible for Elizabeth Mytton Wilbraham which was placed on Vfd on June 10. The original Wilbraham entry, by User:209.96.179.60, has exactly the same peculiarly distinctive formatting as this Harrison entry being discussed here. I left a message on his talk page inviting comment, but that page has since been blanked and the edit history now shows nothing. User:209.96.179.150 has amended both the Harrison and Wilbraham entries with superficial edits. I suspect User:209.96.179.60, User:209.96.179.150 and User:209.96.179.26 are the same person. Neither of them has a previous edit history. Moriori 00:07, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • Reads like a hoax. Delete unless substantially verified. -- Cyrius|✎ 03:21, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I rather doubt the accuracy of this. [|St Mary's] in Monmouth was restored in 1773 (according to their website), so Harrison couldn't possibly have worked on it as an apprentice. The [|website of the Redwood Library] (which he designed) says that Due to lack of sufficient evidence, no record exists on how or where Harrison obtained his architectural training.Average Earthman 06:40, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • Had a further look on the web - according to [| this website] in 1744, the French had attacked the English fortress at Canso, and taken the inhabitants prisoner - and then released the prisoners a year later. So there were large numbers of English people who could testify to the weakness of Louisbourg. Average Earthman 07:02, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Sardino — Discussion

  • No hits on Google about this constructed language, no links to this page from Wikipedia, almost no content explaining why it is of interest (e.g., publications about Sardino, web pages, philosophy behind its design or use -- no proof it even has speakers). On the off chance this subject is of importance & I just haven't kept up with developments, I'm listing it here for someone to rewrite or defend. -- llywrch 00:17, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • llywrch, all VfD listings have an implicit "I'm listing it here for someone to rewrite or defend." You don't have to say it. As it is, it's even written as personal research. Delete YA-conlang. -- Cyrius|✎ 03:19, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - YA-conlang, not particularly notable. -- pne 14:52, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Delete. It sounds more like a practical joke than a serious encyclopedia article. David Cannon 12:02, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

User talk:Yaorao — add to this discussion

  • I know that in general the deletion of users' talk pages is something to be left to the User, but this user curretnly has a 320 kilobyte translation of a BOOK on their user page. I don't know the copyright status of this translation, but just having something that large makes it impossible for anybody to talk to them. RickK 02:35, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • Checking his contributions, there's a small pile of alternate script test pages with large volumes of non-english material. What's really funny is it was all put in the better part of a year ago. Either move it to some user subpage, or delete. A talk page should be kept reasonably clear of things that aren't talk. -- Cyrius|✎ 03:10, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • Agree. While user pages should generally not be modified by anyone except for the user, in this case the page is excessive and unnecessary. blankfaze | • • 03:40, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Move to a user subpage to allow creation of a proper user talk page. Then we'll see whether this user, who is again active after an absence, can explain what they are doing and perhaps take advice as to better ways. Possibly a copyvio; This link is provided on the user page in question too. Likely to be a delete but let's talk about it first. Andrewa 05:53, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • See also User:Yaorao/Twentythree, User:Yaorao/Twentytwo, User:Yaorao/Twentyone, User:Yaorao/Twenty, and User:Yaorao/One. This is almost certainly an account of User:Wanli, who has been banned for this sort of thing (using wikipedia for storage), and used an identical naming scheme. Maximus Rex 06:04, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Adrastice — add to this discussion

  • Yet again another nonsense micronation. RickK 02:54, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • Geez, can't these micronation people at least set up a crummy geocities website? Delete. -- Cyrius|✎ 03:14, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Don't you have anything better to do than to go looking around wikipedia for entries you don't like? What's wrong with writing about our micronation? It exists and can be described. Cartainly if you can write entries about the representatives of every God forsaken U.S. territory and dependancy from here to Mars, then I can have a single entry about my little club.
    • Delegates, excuse me.
      • Don't you have anything better to do than try to get an article about your "little club" into an encyclopedia? -- Cyrius|✎ 05:03, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
        • No
  • MANNNNNNN, I wish we could make these speedy deletion candidates. Really. Axe it ASAP. blankfaze | • • 03:37, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, this is an encyclopedia, not a place for people to write about their "little clubs". That's what livejournal is for. —Stormie 04:51, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - this place does not exist and never will--XmarkX 04:58, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. It's a shame, it's well written but it doesn't belong here. Andrewa 05:33, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. While I find micronations—and the Wikipedia articles that so many of them seem to have—to be more amusing than annoying, nothing in here is verifiable. (And might I add, encyclopedia articles should never use the first person, except as part of a quotation.) —No-One Jones 06:08, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I would like to propose the creation of an Alternate Universe Wikipedia. Such a Wikipedia would contain only those items for which no google hits could be found (a google hit would constitute cause to delete). Then there would be a place for all these cute but pointless micronations, hopeful but pathetic vanity pages, and the adolescent ramblings of nascent poets. And we could get on with the job of compiling real-life material. Denni☯ 02:41, 2004 Jun 16 (UTC)
  • Delete. DJ Clayworth 16:45, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. -- pne 14:55, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Find a plot of land, form a constitution and a form of government, institute a colonial trading system and then make the page on wikipedia. Until then, DELETE. --Marlowe 02:34, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

List of Persian given names — add to this discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of Persian given names Godlike27 — add to this discussion

  • Delete that fxxxin page, what the fxxx are you waiting for? "votes for deletion" please!! thats pathetic, just throw it out if you don't like it. I guess it requires more intelligence than all of you have to understand that something that ends not in .com can be sth. ...bleep... bleep...Twinkle, twinkle, little star, How I wonder what you are... drums and bells and scarecrows
  • A Google search shows the Geocities homepage listed in the extlinks of this article, and some Wikipedia derivatives. Has all the hallmarks of a vanity article. --ESP 04:14, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete vanity. Although Google comes up empty on searches for the discography, Dogpile [2] finds his Geocities site, one Yahoo group, the Wikipedia itself, and nothing more. Numbers three and four on the discography list come up with lots of hits, but none of them relevant. SWAdair | Talk 08:03, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • This also was removed from the VFD (along with Monic tribes below) by 193.219.132.150. S/he has also removed VfD notices from the pages. -- EuroTom 12:25, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, seems to be vanity. RossA 12:29, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Probable vanity, no evidence it's encyclopedic. Andrewa 15:17, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - clear vanity - Tεxτurε 15:55, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Monic Tribes — add to this discussion

  • Another borderline speedy. Ongah Monopa gets zero hits. "monic tribes" gets no hits. "monic tribe" gets no relevant hits. Unfortunately there a language branch named "Monic" (although it looks like the culture's name was "Mon") and a bunch of other Monic hits that don't seem relevant, but there's too many to really wade thru. Mediterra gets hits, but I think it is Italian(?) for Mediterranean (the languages are SE Asia). Niteowlneils 04:39, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment: If this article is about the Mon culture, the most generic statements are true. It is where specific information is given that it seems unverifiable. That always makes me suspicious. If anyone wants to follow up, try reading [3], [4], [5]. SWAdair | Talk 08:21, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • This was removed from VFD by an anon user. (Would you like to explain why?) -- EuroTom 12:02, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC) (Incidently, my vote would be to Delete.) -- EuroTom 05:06, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • He was targeting my edits because of my delete vote for Godlike27 (see above). Already listed on Vandalism in progress for vandalism of multiple pages. I don't think he had anything against this listing -- he just saw my name and decided to blank this one as well. SWAdair | Talk 04:18, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

This discussion is now closed. With two clear votes to delete and no clear votes to keep, the result is DELETE. DJ Clayworth 15:41, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

RookChat — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/RookChat

California 4th Grade Mission Project — Discussion

add to this deletion debate

Orphan with no potential, and incomplete or false facts (I attended fourth grade in California and don't remember any such required project)--Woggly 21:32, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)

  • I also attended grade school in California... it certainly was a required project in the SF Bay Area... although I'm not 100% it was 4th grade. I can try to research further if no one else knows definitively. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 22:13, Apr 1, 2004 (UTC)
  • Well, I was in a Catholic school in Rancho Cucamonga, California, about 450 miles from the Bay Area, while in the fourth grade, and I remeber doing a project on Mission San Jose (my dad still has the model I built), so the project is real, and not just limited to public schools or Northern California. Gentgeen 23:02, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • I attended public school in California in the Sacramento Valley, and we were required to do a mission project. All 4th graders study California history that year, and the missions are a major part of it. Having said that, though, delete this. RickK | Talk 03:09, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • I didn't attend school in CA but would vote to keep this. It appears to be a real thing, fairly interesting, and potentially useful to someone doing research on school curriculae. Eventually I imagine a list of required school projects could be quite an interesting and useful thing. Jgm 03:31, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - Tεxτurε 21:25, 8 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete Pedro 19:40, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. But incorporate information elsewhere, if it is true. Jacob1207 22:43, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep until incorporated somewhere. Project is true, did it in 4th grade. Ivan 23:40, Apr 10, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, but change to historical tense. Attended 4th grade in Southern California during 1990. We never did this. Change to historical tense. Knut 02:40, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Alex Rider Character List — Discussion

From VfD:

  • Non encyclopedic. ping 08:15, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Encyclopedic content, but should be merged with Alex Rider and redirected. Everyking 08:31, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • Agree. Plenty of room in Alex Rider. Merge and redirect. It can always be split back out later if the article gets too large. Rossami 19:18, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Merge and delete. - TB 11:03, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

Happiness by Miyu — Discussion

  • A nice poem but not here. ping 08:17, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - not the proper place to post original poetry. Also, the article describes Happiness by Miyu as "A critically acclaimed feature appearing in DiSCORDER magazine," but I was unable to find anything about it at the DiSCORDER site. A Dogpile search for (DiSCORDER Happiness Miyu) came up empty. Remove the poetry and we still have material that doesn't seem factual. SWAdair | Talk 08:55, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I think it's a pretty awful poem, actually. But anyway, delete.Harry R 11:39, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Yep, whining self-pity is never pretty especially in poetic form. Delete it. -- Derek Ross | Talk 23:40, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete and pass the Zoloft. - Lucky 6.9 22:15, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. -- pne 14:58, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I suggest hurling this article down the stairs. Denni☯ 16:56, 2004 Jun 17 (UTC)

After it's thrown down the stairs it should be stepped on. Kevin Rector 03:59, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Cool! That would make me happier than a Zoloft would! - Lucky 6.9 14:27, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Make-A-Circus — Discussion

  • Advert. ping 08:19, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete advert. "participatory circus theatre" -- hey, that sounds like where I work.  :-) SWAdair | Talk 08:58, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • No vote at this time. Article a) unacceptable as current advert, and b) sounds like drivel. However, it is real, and, in fact, shows up as #2 on the San Francisco Convention & Visitors Bureau's list of "10 Free Things For Families To Do In San Francisco"[6]. And according to press coverage, has been around 25 years [7]. I'll see if I can round up enuf info to replace current contents with NPOV stub. Niteowlneils 19:44, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Apparently it was real. Two listed phone numbers disconnected or used by another business, and Web site www.makeacircus.org now has IBS info. Probably not worth the time to re-write article on dead org. Delete unless someone re-writes. Niteowlneils 23:30, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - TB 11:04, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

How to play the violin — Discussion

from VfD:

Start of How To article. Someone might suggest where it should be transwiki-ed, but it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. There was a previous incarnation of an article of this title, apparently also deleted/transwiki-ed: Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/How to play the violin/June 16 Discussion. --BM 00:49, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  • I feel like these would be ideal subjects for redirects. People obviously search for them. Good idea? Meelar (talk) 00:53, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)
  • But redirect to what? Violin? Delete unless a good redirect can be came up with. hfool 02:23, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • I was thinking violin, yes. Seems like a decent target to me. Also, we could develop a template for wikibooks similar to the one we use for wikiquote (instead of "Wikiquote has a series of quotations by or about X", it could be "Wikibooks has an instruction manual relating to X"). Meelar (talk) 05:26, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)
  • transwiki Yuckfoo 03:29, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. This is knowledge. Mikkalai 03:53, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Hmmm I'm thinking transwiki this article, also merge everything new into Violin. Open to persuasion. Kappa 04:42, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Transwiki to WikiSource: DCEdwards1966 06:15, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)
  • Transwiki, Merge the helpful stuff into violin and Delete. Wyss 20:36, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Can this go to Wikibooks? It should be moved somewhere, in any case. Transwiki/merge, do not delete. ~leif ☺ HELO 05:28, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)
  • Transwiki. Elf-friend 11:13, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - The article is informative. -- Judson 22:02, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, "how to play the violin" is certainly a subject with notability. -- Crevaner 00:13, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. There is no valid reason for its deletion. -- Old Right 00:22, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • Sysop acting on this discussion: in assessing consensus, please note the similarity in user pages and VfD voting patterns between Crevaner and Old Right. Dpbsmith (talk) 02:50, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • I second that. While it is impossible to prove that they are the same person, their behavior is highly suggestive. This has been going on for months. Antandrus 03:18, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
      • Judson as well. Same in all the vfd's here. Could someone ask a developer to check if the ip's are different? Michael Ward 07:36, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Megan1967 02:28, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, rename and rewrite. I suppose as a violinist I should weigh in here. The article could be called violin technique or even basic violin technique -- kill the how-to part of the title. It could cover the French and Russian schools, include a basic repertoire list, and dispense with the how-to style of writing. Potentially it is quite encyclopedic, if it is written as knowledge and not as an instruction manual. Don't really feel like tackling it myself right now though. Antandrus 03:23, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

Median number and Median prime — Discussion

  • These may very well be real sequences that do possess the ascribed properties, but unless "median number" and "median prime", with this meaning, are the accepted terms in the mathematical community, these entries should be deleted as original research. No relevant Google hits for "median prime", and nothing on "median number" relating to this integer sequence from what I've been able to find (this one's tricky though, as there are lots of results unless you add modifiers). I'm also unable to find anything relevant about the discoverer, Paul Muljadi. - Fredrik (talk) 09:10, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Nothing on Mathworld. A lot reads like personal research, though. Delete Dysprosia 09:16, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - agree with Dysprosia. Lupin 11:33, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. It would be a pity to waste such a nice name with a trivial formula which appears to have nothing remarkable about it. Note than since n has to be odd one should replace it by 2k+1; then the kth "medial number" is (4k^2 + 4k + 1 + 1)/2 = 2k^2 + 2k + 1, an integer quadratic polynomial. Now, there are several other integer quadratic polynomials that are "prime rich" for small k, much more than this one. Jorge Stolfi 16:54, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. I change my mind about what I said earlier about the relation of median numbers to centered square numbers. Sloane's OEIS A001844 says nothing about the name "median number", not even calling it a "misnomer". I would like to know who this Paul Muljadi mentioned in the article is. PrimeFan 19:13, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

As the creator of the mentioned pages, naturally I want to keep them. I think all numbers and sequences are interesting. Some, however, are more interesting than others. In this case, the exlicit form of the median curve family {n^2 + a)/2 for alternating odd and even a gives many interesting sequences which exhibit asymptotic properties of prime sequences. These quadratics are easy to create and remember, much easier than using factorials, palindromes, upper/lower bounds, and arcane sieving techniques, etc. In math, simplicity is beautiful.

On the lighter note, they contain more lucky-13 primes (13, 113, etc.) than the lucky primes sequence, and their name, median primes, sounds better than centered squared numbers. Giftlite 00:20, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • I think numbers and sequences are interesting too, but Wikipedia is not the place for promoting your own discoveries. Fredrik (talk) 09:07, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Donald Spampinato, Alfred Marchand, Gerald F. Hardacre, Hilda Marcin — Discussion

  • These individuals died a tragic death but did nothing significant enough during their lives to warrant inclusion in this encyclopedia. Transwiki to wikimemorial and delete. --Jiang 09:28, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Agree, transwiki to Wikimemorial. Fredrik (talk) 09:32, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Transwiki and delete. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:24, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • All old entries that predate the creation of Wikimemorial. Transwiki and delete. Rossami 02:03, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

User:ProjeX — Discussion

  • Those wacky Tmxxine guys are back again, using Wikipedia as a free Wiki hosting service. This is after having removing Tmxxine after VfD agreement to delete, and having it put back again more or less immediately. This user has not even attempted to make any encyclopedic edits. -- The Anome 14:29, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete this stuff for the (third? fourth?) time. SWAdair | Talk 23:41, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Weeeelll.. although this Tmxxine stuff is totally delete-worthy, is the deletion of user pages within the mandate of Votes For Deletion? If so, I vote delete. —Stormie 02:06, Jun 14, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Yes, we've done it before, with some difficulty reaching consensus and acting on it admittedly. Andrewa 03:25, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete with prejudice. - TB 11:14, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

Katalyst — Discussion

  • Move to BJAODN? — Timwi 16:04, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • The facts of the story are verifiable: TVNZ story, Aardvark.co.nz story. Worth an article? Would need to be under Philip Greig and this be a redirect at best - David Gerard 16:20, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Send to cleanup and get rid of that illustration. Meelar 18:10, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • $8000 in credit card fraud does not a criminal mastermind delete...er, make. Got ahead of myself there. Delete, and even if the article is kept, delete the image. "Owned" jokes aren't funny, and wouldn't belong in articles if they did. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:22, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. does every minor criminal deserve a page in wikipedia? I kind of hope not (: -- siroxo 22:59, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • Minor criminals do not count as notable in my mind. Recommend delete unless he's done more than this. Rossami 01:55, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 19:24, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

Spreadeagle — Discussion

Untitled

From VfD:

  • Dicdef; maybe if there were a discussion of police forces that use it, regulations of, etc., but defining it (with an eye toward bdsm) is just lexical.Geogre 17:21, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Stub, looks fine to me. blankfaze | •• 20:19, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Perfect stub. -- Cimon 02:22, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Near-dicdef, but the second paragraph (specifically the referrence to the St. Andrew's Cross) saved it for me. SWAdair | Talk 03:05, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - a decent stub with potential to grow. - TB 11:15, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

Hmm. A disambiguation too far, perhaps? -- Cimon.

Is there a sexual position called "spreadeagle" beyond the BDSM reference? The Bondage position seems to be covered in the same stub as the police submission technique position. Maybe the (sex) link is superfluous? -- Cimon.

Wrong picture?

Nice picture, but is it a spreadeagle? The arms aren't exactly stretched out. 81.153.43.82 15:34, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Her arms are spread far enough to qualify. She clearly can't bring her hands down below her shoulders. Johntex\talk 16:42, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A straight-armed picture would probably illustrate spreadeagle better, though nice pic anyway! 213.78.77.161 20:30, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Supine?

Must a person be supine to be in a spreadeagle? The list of sex positions implies that one could also be prone. --Strait 17:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right, and I have amended the article. The dictionary definition is "held or secured with the arms and legs stretched out, originally especially to be flogged"; nothing about which way you're facing. I agree with the comment above that the picture isn't really a spreadeagle as the arms aren't stretched out - but it's a nice picture.--Taxwoman 12:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About gordon wilson — Discussion

  • Non-notable (Google doesn't even put this guy at the top of its search for his exact name). The page should be Gordon Wilson if there is someone notable of that name. Only thing of note is that his daughter was killed by terrorists. --Rory ☺ 17:49, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • I made it a redirect to Gordon Wilson, which already mentions this Gordon Wilson (and two others). Since he later became a senator in Ireland (which I added a note of to the article), he may deserve a separate article, but this isn't it, nor is it a valid title. PS Google "gordon wilson" ira or "gordon wilson" senator Niteowlneils 19:38, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • Does it not need to keep the VFD notice? I don't think we should have this, even as a redirect, simply on the basis of the article title. It's just wrong. --Rory ☺ 19:51, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
      • Not as far as I know--I've seen plenty of VfD entries redirected--Inter alia looks like the most recent example[8]. Niteowlneils 21:41, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • It's not a useful redirect. Should still be deleted. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:16, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • The reason I generally lean towards keeping user-created invalid titles as redirects is to reduce the chances of it getting re-created (as an article) in the future--I figure if one person expected to find it there, someone else may, too. Niteowlneils 21:41, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Useless redirect. Keeel eeeet. DO'Neil
  • Delete. No useful information or therefore history to keep, useless as a redirect. Andrewa 09:51, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

2145 — Discussion

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. Vacuum c 16:38, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)

2145

An article by this name was deleted back in June. The contents of the new article are "the number that comes after 2144 if you count up." DCEdwards1966 00:01, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC)

  • Pure ridiculousness, possibly from a vandal bot. Speedy delete. - Lucky 6.9 00:05, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Speedy. I almost laughed. Almost. JRM 00:06, 2004 Dec 28 (UTC)
  • Delete. Well, it's NPOV, non-vanity and verifiable. But just not a very notable number. P Ingerson 00:36, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Probably vanity from the number concerned, I think it just wants to show off by being in an encyclopedia despite its lack of achievements. Seriously, if we let this in then we'll have an infinite number of other articles to create. Rje 01:18, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    It's no 0, that's all I'm saying. Does 2145 have a user page yet? We could leave a friendly reminder not to create vanity pages. Should someone else have enough material for an article, we will of course judge that on its own merits, and put in the link to Category:Wikipedians with article. JRM 01:28, 2004 Dec 28 (UTC)
  • Comment: Presumably created because someone clicked on a red link [9] Kappa 01:42, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. utcursch 10:32, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC)
  • Redirect to 22nd century, like most of the individual years from that century (i.e., 2142) --Plutor 16:02, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Redirect to 22nd century as above. David Johnson [T|C] 17:00, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not encyclopedic because it provides no useful information to anyone old enough to read the article. If I had seen it before the VfD listing I would have speedy-deleted it as a "very short article with little or no context." If anyone ever has anything meaningful to say about the number they can create a new article under this heading without prejudice. This is not a helpful start on an article about 2145, nor does it point out an important topic that we need an article on. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:00, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Merge anything useful into 143 and delete. It's a multiple of a notable prime, not notable in itself. iMeowbot~Mw 09:24, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete or rename 2145(number)
  • Strong delete. I know that 2145 comes after 2144 if you count up. This example of patent nonsense is the sort of stuff I don't want to see on Wikipedia. Scott Gall 03:14, 2 Jan 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 on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

Dave Ethans — Discussion

  • "Well-known" businessman and philanthropist who gets no Google hits. Everyking 19:25, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • If he’s not a “celebrity CEO”, I would not expect him to turn up in a Google search. On the other hand, he does not show up in list of billionaires which is based on the Forbes 400 list. Keep only if verified. Rossami 01:45, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • Celebrity or not, it's very hard for me to imagine that one of the "world's richest people" could turn up no Google hits. Everyking 02:22, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - I am a well-known businessman and philanthropist (heck, I gave three cents to that take-a-penny tray...) - Tεxτurε 16:24, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep only if verified. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 19:29, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment: The creator of the article added this to the talk page: "Dave Ethans???? Changed the name to David Ebner, or something like that. It's just a fuking man who betrayed Ireland (his own country). He spends his 900 millions down in Switzerland and Germany. He possesses a bank in Berlin.. Just a asshole!!!!" Everyking 21:14, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Potential chemical warfare agent — Discussion

  • Poorly written microstub, and as written it is redundant with Chemical warfare which is its only link. KeithTyler 20:19, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Chemical warfare Rossami 01:31, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Contains no useful material. Redirect will be useless, anyone searching will get the main article. Andrewa 03:20, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • "Potential chemical warfare agent" appears to be a well-known phrase -- a Google search turns up many hits, including some which appear to be technical military documents [10], [11]. Since someone might search for that exact phrase, a redirect to chemical warfare is appropriate, until someone can expand potential chemical warfare agent into a real article. Wile E. Heresiarch 09:29, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

This debate is now closed. Consensus was to delete or redirect: redirect can do no harm so it is redirected. DJ Clayworth 15:45, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Vanir/Aesir theory — Discussion

Vanir/Aesir theory was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. 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 to delete.

  • Original, suspect research by User:Kenneth Alan who continues on inserting this sort of material as if it were fact. RickK 21:21, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: The theory that the Vanir represented a people conquered by the invading Germanic tribes (who brought the Aesir with them and encoded their victory as a war between gods) goes to Snorri Sturlusson in 1200 AD Iceland, at least. The author of this article doesn't like this "theory," wants to make it part of the (real) 19th century nationalist archeology, and then wants to make one's position on this "theory" a reflection of one's present-day ethnicity. It's pretty weird. When I studied Anglo-Saxon and Old Norse, we never heard that Snorri Sturlusson was a proto-Nazi. Astounding article! I'd hope for a bibliography five yards long, if it weren't personal, idiosyncratic, and conspiracy minded. (Sorry for being wordy, but this is an area I do know.) Cleanup would mean stripping, and the relevant facts of the Vanir/Aesir can be (and is, I think) in the separate articles on Aesir and Vanir. Geogre 22:53, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • delete. Zw 23:13, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Original research. —No-One Jones 04:32, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, reluctantly. The theory of the two ethnic groups and two god groups may well deserve a page. It is hardly unquestionable, and relates also to turn of the last century theories about Aryan conquerors; the persistance of beliefs about those alleged conquests long after they've been shown to be speculative is a bee in my own bonnet as well. Most of this text is probably beyond cleanup, though. Smerdis of Tlön 16:00, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. I did a chunk of rewritting on this because I have a low bull tolerance for this sort of thing but the history pages made it clear that just getting rid of it was going to be hard to push through. See the related page Non-Indo-European roots of Germanic languages. I have found a couple of reputable researchers pursuing something similar, but if Vanir/Aesir theory goes it should probably go too. Diderot 20:17, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete -- One could rename by moving to "Vanir/Æsir theories" (not "theory" and with proper spelling "Æsir") and write an excellent POV article on different ideas put forth by different scholars, e.g. that the Vanir were gods of an earlier Scandinavian people and the Æsir were later imports, or George Dumezil's theories that the Vanir are just as Indo-European as the Æsir, but belonged to a different category of gods in the Proto-Indo-European system, related to the Nasatyas of Hindu mythology and the Dioscuri of Greek cult (rather than the Dioscuri of Greek mythology.) Lots of good stuff. But I don't see anyone interested in doing this at the moment. I'm not. jallan 14:59, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete -- it's just an assumption and definitely not NPOV; might be moved over to wikisource as an essay? -- towo 16:11, 2004 Jun 19 (UTC)
  • Deleted, but I resent people putting the spin on it as if it were a Nazi work. Back in the olden days the vikings had no fear of Jewish people calling them Nazis because they had no reason to. Ever since WWII there is no permissability for discussion of related matters to any positive perception. Thank you POV Mainstream Media, you make the world kiss your ass! Lord Kenneð Alansson 20:21, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

Memoization — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Memoization

Design in Singapore — Discussion

  • Advertising. Mandel 22:05, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • delete -- Jmabel 01:01, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - Wikipedia is not a list of web-links. - TB 11:19, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

June 14

More Sep 11 victims — Discussion
Thomas F. McGuinness, Jr. (and the redirect Tom McGuinness), Jeffrey Collman, Sara Elizabeth Low, John Ogonowski, Jean Destrehan Roger (and the redirect Jean Roger), Anna Williams Allison, David Lawrence Angell (and the redirect David Angell), Seima Aoyama, Myra Aronson (and the redirect Myra Joy Aronson), Carolyn Beug

  • More September 11 victims whose articles are better served in Wikimemorial. Rossami 02:27, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Move and delete - Tεxτurε 04:44, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Angell co-created Frasier, among other things. Strong keep (tho' the 'memorial' comment should probably link to Wikimemorial, not Talk, and the article should focus on his notable career more than 9/11). Carolyn Beug won an award for producing a Van Halen video--certainly seems to pass 'audience of 5000' test. Keep. Seima Aoyama and Myra Aronson are already just redirs to the 9/11 Wiki already, so they belong on Redirs for Deletion, if anything--I don't see the harm, at least as long as someone makes sure no Wikipedia pages link to them. Niteowlneils 06:00, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • OK, I checked and no WP articles link to Aoyama or "Myra Aronson", nor "Myra Joy Aronson", which is also just a redir to 911: (only links are VfD, Wikipedia:List of interwiki redirects, and a user's Talk page sub-page. Niteowlneils 06:21, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • Sorry. I thought I'd weeded the transwiki links out. Striking Aoyama and Aronson from the list. Rossami 13:13, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep David Angell and Carolyn Beug, no vote on the rest. Everyking 06:32, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep David Angell and Carolyn Beug, delete the rest. DJ Clayworth 19:36, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep David Angell and Carolyn Beug, delete the rest. -- Jmabel 01:03, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep David Angell and Carolyn Beug, delete the rest. --Jiang 04:01, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Bill callahan — Discussion
Not sure if this is salvageable, or if this is even factual, but it may have some potential... -- Grunt 02:34, 2004 Jun 14 (UTC)

  • Check out the credit at the bottom. I think this is a copyvio. - Lucky 6.9 03:41, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • It is copyvio, alright, from [12]. The same text, but with better capitalization, can also be found at [13]. I've taken the appropriate actions for copyvio material, including removing the VfD tag from the article, as it is no longer a VfD item, but a copyvio item. SWAdair | Talk 08:53, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

HLA Adventure — Discussion

  • Blatant self-promotion. This user, Paul Allen Panks, has also spammed Interactive Fiction repeatedly. [14]. — Adam Conover † 02:42, Jun 14, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete unless someone can make a case for significance. Similarly on the other related one below. -- Jmabel 01:05, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, advert. Andris 14:36, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

Westfront PC: The Trials of Guilder — add to this discussion

  • Blatant self-promotion by the same user as HLA Adventure above, only for a different one of his games. — Adam Conover † 02:46, Jun 14, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Self-promotion and non-encyclopaedic content. Ditto for the two related pages. -- Gschmidl 23:51, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Paul Panks — add to this discussion

Paul Panks

  • Vanity page by the same user as the creator of the above two pages -- namely, Paul Panks himself. (Perhaps we should choose one page to discuss all three of these pages -- I suggest /Paul Panks. — Adam Conover † 02:56, Jun 14, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable. The two other pages should obviously be deleted too. --Zundark 07:23, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. For the reasons quoted above. -- Roger Firth 81.144.178.66 08:30, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Admittedly a vanity page, and not notable. Same for the two related pages. --Jake 23:36, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Paul keeps creating vanity pages for himself, every few months. --Rpresser 13:20, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)
  • Delete. Someone should create a page about me, if I am notable, obviously. Wasn't aware of the autobiography rule, although knew about the vanity rule. -- Paulpanks 9:53, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)

The Risen Realm — Discussion

  • Non-notable blog page. Only Google hits are mirrors back to the site. I found this when I speedy-nominated a nonsense page its creator sk89q made. - Lucky 6.9 03:28, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, not encyclopaedia material. fyi, Alexa traffic rank is 365,890. [15] —Stormie 07:37, Jun 14, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable. DJ Clayworth 18:07, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable. Andris 14:38, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

Devil dog — Discussion

  • Zero hits for "Leo Cannus" (dog=canis, ha ha). Zero hits for "Reuplos Richmand" (or the more common 'o' spelling). Too many hits for "Devil dog", to go thru them all, but as far as I went they all seem to relate to people and things about war and the military, or things related to regular dogs, not whatever this is. Niteowlneils 04:53, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Unless anyone thinks they can salvage this, I say delete. Nick04 10:35, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: Sure is funny, in that "Bermuda Triangle from Atlantis's UFO's" kind of way. There is much to say about the myth and literary significance of the Hell Hound and its origins (in the Wild Hunt), but this article seems like it came from the supermarket checkout. Geogre 10:45, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Even W33kly W°rld N3wz has editorial standards, which this article would fail to meet. Denni☯ 02:56, 2004 Jun 16 (UTC)
  • I know a W33kly W°rld N3wz contributor that would wholeheartedly agree. Delete and definitely BJAODN. - Lucky 6.9 17:25, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Yppotryl — Discussion

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 by Khaosworks (nonsense) --cesarb 02:37, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yppotryl

Zero hits for "Yppotryl "Oakley County". All 12 hits for Yppotryl are at "Cryptozoology" sites. No relevant hits for Yppotryl remains found. From same IP as Devil dog above. Niteowlneils 04:53, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • A joke article. See Ypotryll for the real thing. Apparently, this was deleted once before? (see previous comment's date) Delete. Emiao 03:11, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedied. --khaosworks 03:17, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
    • Blast away at the orphaned talk page, if you would be so kind. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 03:24, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
  • Couldn't this be redirected to Ypotryll to avoid recreation? Mgm|(talk) 11:36, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
    • ... especially as there's now a dangling hyperlink in cryptozoology that someone will otherwise eventually try to fill in (again). I agree with MacGyverMagic. Redirect mis-spelling that people have actually made in creating articles. In fact, as the prior article has been deleted, I've been bold. Uncle G 15:32, 2005 Jun 4 (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.

Irvine High School, Irvine — Discussion

Notability

From VfD:

  • This a substub about yet another high school with a title that no one would possibly think to look up. - Lucky 6.9 05:52, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • No vote but I took the liberty of splitting the submission so I can vote separately on the second. Rossami 13:36, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - this stub could grow notable graduates, external links, catchment info and more. - TB 11:24, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • No problem here since the consensus seems to be that entries about high schools should be kept. If it is kept, it should be retitled simply "Irvine High School." That was a major point of my original objection. - Lucky 6.9 15:10, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - due to the size of school, I am certain we can find some famous alum. Regardless, it has been slightly expanded. Burgundavia 09:15, Jun 19, 2004 (UTC)

end moved dicussion

Facebook group

David Winterhalter, one of the school's first yearbook photographers, has posted a mass of photos from 1975 through 1980 on Facebook. The group contains images viewable to the public: Irvine High-The First Four Years. FYI... Binksternet (talk) 17:11, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, some of the images are newspaper scans which could be used as references. Binksternet (talk) 18:03, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Irvine High School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:24, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Irvine High School. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:00, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Irvine Unified School District — Discussion

From VfD:

  • This a highly POV stub that really says nothing about the subject in question. The content could potentially apply to any district. Plus, how notable can a school district be? My wife's worked for one for fourteen years. It's a great gig, but the district itself simply isn't notable IMO. - Lucky 6.9 05:52, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I took the liberty of splitting this from the previous topic so I could vote separately. Delete unless someone can show why this is notable. Rossami 13:36, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep; has potential. Such a page could list all schools within the district, demographics, compliance with state standards, test scores, etc. IMO, school information should be added with a bot, much like city info is added by User:Rambot. --Diberri | Talk 21:51, Jun 14, 2004 (UTC)
    • FWIW, I've rewritten the article to remove the unabashed POV-ness. --Diberri | Talk 06:28, Jun 20, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete unless improved. At the present state the only NPOV information is that it's located in Irvine, California. Andris 14:41, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep the rewritten version. Andris 02:16, Jun 21, 2004 (UTC)
  • I concur with Andris. This is highly POV and unexceptional. Jxg 02:26, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

Teacher of the year, et al.

This isn't useful information and should be removed, IMHO. --David Iberri (talk) 03:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've removed it. Wikipedia is not a repository of these sorts of lists. If you'd like, provide a link to IUSD's home page, and readers can presumably find the list there. --David Iberri (talk) 16:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anywhere in that link where it says that lists are not allowed. I am not sure the difference in this type of list (for this audience) versus a list on a more universal page (Academy Awards for that audience). Scope of audience is the only variable.

IUSD is a major reason why families move to Irvine, and those award winners matter to the community. I can understand your POV as someone outside Irvine. More to the point, I am not sure how the page is better without the info: It surely offers a bit more meat to the wiki

Go Bruins! Though, you may want to stick to the medical wikis, I think you are off base on this one. :) All if fun...I trust any final edit as you seem to know the ins and outs far more than a noob like me. Just wanted to state the case of someone inside the city. --User:Octagon77 (talk)

There's nothing wrong with being proud of your city's school system, but this isn't the best way to do it. Audience isn't the only variable here: notability also comes into play because we're building an encyclopedia. Although they perform a vital job, most teachers aren't notable and probably shouldn't be mentioned in an encyclopedia (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools). Consider this: would you expect Encyclopedia Britannica to have a list of teachers of the year? Of course not. Sure it's information, but it's not encyclopedic. And just adding more meat to the wiki isn't the goal. If you want to say that some families move to Irvine because of IUSD, then just say that in the article. Cheers, David Iberri (talk) 15:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC) P.S. My POV is from someone who's lived in southern CA for 25 years, one of which was spent in Irvine (oh how I miss that apartment on Alton...), so don't be so quick to dismiss me as an outsider. :-) (In fact, if you'll read the discussion above, you'll see that I'm the reason this article didn't get deleted a year ago!)[reply]
Form the WikiProject Schools, it does indicate "Names of noteworthy (e.g. award-winning, published) faculty of the past can be mentioned." Certainly that is most applicable to universities, but within the community, it seems valid on a more local level. Wikipedia is already more expansive than any print Enclyclopedia, so comparing it to one doesn't seem terribly useful. I figure that once the page is there, adding more info gives personality. Perhaps adding this type of information aids in a district becoming more notable? Especially given it does seem to fit under the WikiProject suggestions. --User:Octagon77 (talk)
I see your point about it adding personality, which is a good thing, IMO. And sure, comparing WP to EB isn't completely apples-to-apples for many reasons. But my bigger point is that articles on schools, districts, etc., shouldn't include teachers of the year because Wikipedia (any encyclopedia, really) isn't a repository for this type of information. Lists of primary source material aren't generally considered encyclopedic. I would support a list whose elements were encyclopedic (eg, list of Nobel laureates), but a list of unencyclopedic material just doesn't belong. Actually, I just discovered Wikipedia:Embedded lists, which seems to echo some of these points more clearly. --David Iberri (talk) 19:43, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maps

WhisperToMe (talk) 22:55, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mode of transmission — add to this discussion

  • Not exactly encyclopedia-grade material, and Modulation constains a supserset of the information on this page. Should probably be replaced by a redirect to Modulation. --fvw 17:07, 2004 Jun 14 (UTC)
    • Agree. Redirect. Rossami 16:25, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Intellectual property right infringement — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Intellectual property right infringement

Virtual world — Discussion

Future section outdated

Could we get a source here that was published less than a decade ago? Violsva (talk) 19:52, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think Future should probably point to Metaverse. With respect to the Metaverse you have more talk about the move of work and commerce into the virtual.--K.Nevelsteen (talk) 21:15, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More narrow focus than title implies

This article is linked to from several others that imply it is about the general concept of virtual 3D environments in video games and such (eg: the opening of Virtual camera system), however it seems to be more specifically about virtual worlds with many players and customizable characters like in MMORPGs or SecondLife-esque games. Is this intentional, and if so is there a more general article about the former concept? Because this page does not appear to be about "the general concept of virtual worlds" like the top line indicates. --Ringtail Raider (talk) 05:03, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Like (preposition) — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Like (preposition)

Human Knowledge: Foundations and Limits — Discussion

Website does not seem to be well-known enough yet, and article author claims to be the website author. --Zigger 15:36, 2004 Jun 14 (UTC)

  • Delete - advert/vanity - article only exists to advertise the website - Tεxτurε 21:14, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Definitely delete. Not only is it advert/vanity but it's completely un-notable. --Marlowe 02:39, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Un-notable and advert. Andris 14:43, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

Memeware — Discussion

Does not seem to be in usage apart from Human Knowledge: Foundations and Limits (see above). Article contributor claims to be author of that website. --Zigger 15:47, 2004 Jun 14 (UTC)

  • Delete - advert/original work - unless this memeware concept usage extends beyond the one author it should be deleted - Tεxτurε 21:16, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - neologism. It can be recreated if and when there are some notable examples of said concept around. - TB 11:27, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Obscure neologism. Andris 14:44, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

Donna Peele — add to this discussion

  • Seems to have no notability of her own. Only 300 hits for "Donna Peele" to begin with, and if you look at the titles and excerpts, they are virtually all articles about Charlie Sheen or short-lived marriages in general. Some are about at least two other "Donna Peele"s. About the only one that's about her, that isn't about the marriage, is a laundry list of clients of Vera Wang. Also, note that none of the articles call her a "supermodel", just "model"--"Donna Peele" supermodel gets zero hits. Niteowlneils 16:59, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • This is just another "sub-substub" from the idiot who signs on via a different proxy each time, drops his/her load (I'm leaning toward "her" based on the subject matter) and then leaves a mess for the rest of us to clean up. Though I'm the one who listed it for cleanup, I wholeheartedly support deleting this and I support the notion of bending the rules a bit and speed-deleting this individual's nonsense on sight. Better a red link than a blue one leading to something nearly useless, IMO. - Lucky 6.9 17:12, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • Oi, mate! Guys watch soaps too. But I totally understand (especially regarding this IP range's contribs). Delete. TheCustomOfLife 22:24, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I saw this one when you listed it for cleanup, fired it up in the editor, and like Niteowlneils did the Google thing. I then retreated in confusion, since there was literally nothing I could find to add other than the date of her wedding. Which scarcely seemed worthwhile. So I too must, concur, Delete. —Stormie 00:36, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
  • If this is all that can be said about her, Delete. Average Earthman 12:40, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Pleasant Valley High School — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Pleasant Valley High School

Pleasant Valley School District — Discussion

Institutional religion — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Institutional religion

Timberwolf (Marvel Comics) — Discussion

  • This article is patent nonsense. No character named Timberwolf ever appeared in X-Men; he certainly didn't appear in #165. So far as I know Marvel's never had a character named Timberwolf or any characters called "Zorgs". And you can check imdb to confirm the non-existance of the alleged six-year TV show. This is fanfiction. -Sean Curtin 18:18, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Apologies for the confusion. Generally, if something is false but looks plausible, as in this case, it's best to say that it's false and possibly provide references (for example, in this case, there are no relevant google hits. Again, no hard feelings. Delete. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 18:32, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
No problem. -Sean Curtin 18:37, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Garbh Sgeir — Discussion

  • "Garbh Sgeir is a rock next to the islet Oigh-Sgeir, in the Small Isles."
  • No suggestion as to why the rock might be notable (it seems it isn't), and no real prospect of expansion beyond this single sentence. Warofdreams 19:04, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - disk is cheap. I've added a few more details to the stub through and will try to add still more soon. - TB 23:48, Jun 14, 2004 (UTC)
    • The next person who writes "disk is cheap" should be made to send a $50 donation to help replace the horribly overloaded Wikimedia server. DJ Clayworth 15:39, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
      • If load on the servers is an issue, should we not be voting to delete the most popular articles not the least? (just kidding!) TB 11:56, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, it's just a rock, but it's a nice little stub, nothing to be gained by deleting it. —Stormie 00:40, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Obscure but encyclopedic, and quite interesting. Andrewa 01:16, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Significant enough to be protected by Scottish Natural Heritage. Besides, disk is cheap. I'll send my $50 when I find a job. JamesMLane 13:19, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)


The laws of being an animated character — Discussion

-

  • original 'research'/conjecture. Not a valid topic. Maximus Rex 20:04, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 20:39, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Ilyanep 20:46, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Przepla 22:05, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete original research theresa knott 22:27, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. EddEdmondson 22:48, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete and consider the deletion of Gag characters by the same user as conjecture. - Lucky 6.9 23:10, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Cute but unencyclopedic. Delete. DJ Clayworth 15:28, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Elliot Haughin — Discussion

  • Delete - vanity - Personal blog, etc. - Tεxτurε 21:03, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • delete, vanity -- Jmabel
  • Delete. Near empty article lacking in interest or note. Average Earthman 13:04, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Looks like a new user who has misunderstood what Wikipedia is. Andris 14:48, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

The Journey of the Magi — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/The Journey of the Magi

Dijonnaise — Discussion

  • Um, yes, so what? Can anything more be said about this? Does this deserve and article? RickK 22:48, Jun 14, 2004 (UTC)
  • I've written small yet informative articles on Crest toothpaste and Jif, so I'm thinking some information needs to be made known about its first ad campaign, and when it was first introduced on the market. I remember when they first unveiled it, the ad campaign had "Dij-dij-dij-dijonnaise" to the tune of Duke of Earl. But the way the article looks right now? Chuck it. Someone prove me wrong and try to save it! TheCustomOfLife 22:53, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Someone was apparently fixing a sandwich when all of a sudden...BAM! An article is born. Or was it? I agree that little more can be said about this stuff. I'm thinking delete this as an orphan substub. - Lucky 6.9 23:13, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, more could be said about this (think history, corporate ownership, notable ad campaigns, etc.). [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 12:57, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

June 15

Hector the Hero — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Hector the Hero

Schnorrer — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Schnorrer

WZebra — Discussion

  • Advertisement for non-notable software. Mentioned in Reversi along with vanity links for the creators; I suggest removing their names but keeping the external link there. Fredrik (talk) 03:16, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Acegikmo1 17:08, Jun 20, 2004 (UTC)

Esmeraldas — Discussion

  • This page was a copy of Argentina national football team with no extra useful information. A quick Google search doesn't show any association between "Esmeraldas" and the team. Esmeraldas actually appears to be a place in Ecuador, but there is no mention of it on Wikipedia yet.
  • delete. --ssd 03:52, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Andris 14:50, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

Fan fiction syndrome — Discussion

  • Neologism - Only google hits are for Wikipedia and other open encyclopedias that have dumped the same text. While I agree the phenomenon exists, the article is not encyclopedic and will not become so unless the term falls into general usage. - Drhaggis 04:12, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • If no-one else uses it, delete, NOT redirect/merge. Average Earthman 13:06, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • merge into Fan fiction and redirect. Andy Mabbett 08:46, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Don't even merge, unless we can verify the content somehow--this is pure opinion. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 12:55, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Original research, I'm afraid, unless we can find a reference - David Gerard 14:32, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I can not find any non-Wikipedia references to this either. Delete as neologism/original research. Rossami 16:33, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Stars are falling — Discussion

  • Minor band, only one release which seems to be self-published. This was listed on Cleanup for a few weeks thanks to the rather un-NPOV vanity nature of the writeup, but nobody did anything with it. imho it should be deleted. —Stormie 04:28, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)

Fuck Marry Kill — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Fuck Marry Kill

Logophile — Discussion

  • Orphan bad joke dicdef. Delete. -- Graham  :) | Talk 07:55, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Cleaned up. Dysprosia 08:02, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - An unpopular but real term. Could develop links to famous logophiles and such. - TB 08:36, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
  • Redirect. As all obsucre phobias are redirected to -phobia all obscure philias should redirect to -philia. - SimonP 13:31, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)

Yanai Shinsaku — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Yanai Shinsaku

Dan Gillmor — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Dan Gillmor

Greasy — Discussion

  • Was going to speedy, but the content ("See megatokyo forums") led me to think those who know about Megatokyo might object. However, seems pretty clear cut that this article should go. Nick04 18:08, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Redirect to grease, possibly deleting first. -- Cyrius|✎ 19:35, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Deleted and redirected to grease. There's no reason it should point anywhere else. Guanaco 03:25, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Megatokyo forums — Discussion

  • I agree with Nick04 on this. Admittedly, I'm not sure if this is a cleanup candidate for an article about a notable forum or if it's a vanity page. I'll list it for cleanup as well. - Lucky 6.9 18:15, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I think Megatokyo is more of a cleanup. I vote to keep this article. It does need lots of work, getting rid of POV (one example, "Seawaffle, one of the newer mods, watches this forum while eating babies"). We certainly don't need to know specific moderators for each forum (IMO). But Greasy should certainly go. Nick04 18:35, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Sounds good. It's on the cleanup page now, but I'm having trouble getting the boilerplate to show. - Lucky 6.9 18:51, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I took the liberty of reverting the article to the version prior to the "eating babies" and "garbage heap of the internet" type comments. -- Cyrius|✎ 18:51, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Ah, vandals! I thought it looked too involved to be original. Looks great now. Should greasy be speed-deleted since the redirect no longer applies? - Lucky 6.9 19:04, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • geeze it's a web comic forum page, let some levity in (curently the entry sounds too self importent)
  • Beter uze yer spel chek. and rimember to leev yer signatoor... uh, sugnotur... uh, jus put yer x on yer post. - Lucky 6.9 07:04, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I created the article because, as the article states, it is certainly one of the more popular English forums. Something Awful, to compare, has an extensive article. I'll work on the article. -- Slowking Man 19:25, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

Congenital — Discussion

  • I don't see how this could be more than a dictionary entry.
  • I believe this page should stay - either way, I've thoroughly rewritten this entry to make it less dictionary like. Keep. Nick04 19:01, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Birth defect? -- Cyrius|✎ 19:38, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Move to congenital disorder and Wiktionary. Encyclopedia entries describe things, not words; nouns, not adjectives. anthony (see warning)
  • Delete. Aside from it just being a dictdef that should be removed, "birth defect" isn't the only use of the word congenital. The word itself has nothing to do with birth defects. It just means existing at, or dating from, or pertaining to birth, and is used for things other than birth defects. So, it should not be redirected anywhere. It should just be deleted. - Centrx 21:11, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Redirect to congenital disorder. JFW | T@lk 10:01, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • It belongs in Wiktionary because this is primarily a dictionary definition. I consider it too vague a topic to ever be much more. However, there are many solid articles which link to it. In this case, I recommend keep. Rossami 16:39, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • At the same time, as it stands it really doesn't belong in the Wiktionary because what is there is not the definition for the word. It is misleading and inaccurate. - Centrx 16:50, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Law School Outlines — add to this discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Law School Outlines

5K programing competition — add to this discussion

A substub Ad. Krik 23:34, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete --Tagishsimon
  • This is not only rubbish content but misspelt, so we'd lose nothing deleting this. However, it's a real competition that deserves an article. Take a correctly-spelt request to Requested Articles? - David Gerard 14:30, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - The current page is an ad, however, it seems like a legitimte web-design award, with decent google hits and a few years worth of winners. Needs a rewrite. Maybe move to 5K web-design award to lesten the onus on entry-scouting. TPK 02:48, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Vulcan Raven — Discussion


Article listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion June 15 to June 30 2004, consensus was not reached. Discussion:

  • Reads like a copyvio, though I can't find from where, makes no mention of what universe this apparently fictional character comes from, nonsense. RickK 23:50, Jun 15, 2004 (UTC)
  • I think it's from a game series called Metal Gear Solid. Joyous 00:15, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • Yes, it definitely is, and it does say, but only as a note at the end. I added a note at the beginning though, but I'm not sure if it should be deleted, unless we can find that it's a copyvio. perhaps they just traced the backstory through the game? - Xgkkp 00:20, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • No vote (do we keep articles on Playstation characters? I honestly don't know), just a comment on the copy. It is highly unlikely this was copied from the web. I used Dogpile's advanced search, trying all sorts of combinations, and came up empty. It looks like it may have been paraphrased from multiple sources. One thing makes me wonder -- the unnecessary capitalization of "Mercenary" makes it look like it may have been copied from in-game messages. I have no way to check. Anyone? SWAdair | Talk 07:42, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • we keep articles on other fictional characters, and as games go it's a pretty big series. I think probably the original might have been copied from one of those "solutions" books that get sold alongside every major game nowadays. Now however, it looks more like a proper article. - Xgkkp 21:35, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • The original stank of copyvio to high heaven, but I couldn't find it online either. Keep excellent new article. - Lucky 6.9 01:09, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • not a copyvio. I wrote it out. AmericanRobot 21:37, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • I highly doubt that. Of course I have NO proof, but I believe on intuition that no one would object when I call you a liar and plagarizer. And please use the discussion link next time. IF I was wrong, then PROVE it. I will only apologize when you PROVE that is not a copyvio. Cody The Blue Bomber 21:50, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

ill do as I please.

  • Well how about you PROVE that it is. No one else can PROVE that, because it cannot be PROVEd. Silly old cody the blue bomber AmericanRobot 22:06, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • That doesn't change the fact that you're a liar and no one has objected to it. Cody The Blue Bomber 22:11, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
      • I object! AmericanRobot 22:13, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
        • You're the only one who objects. How pathetic. If there is a consensus among Wikipedians that I was wrong to imply that you were a liar and plagarizer based on a strong intuition, then I will apologize. Otherwise, you are are a liar and plagarizer. Cody The Blue Bomber 22:18, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
          • I object. Please do not bite the newcomers. If you suspect that an article is a copyright violation, but cannot find a source for it yourself, it is appropriate to say "hey, I think this might be a copyright violation", and ask if anyone else has any info. I don't think it's appropriate to call someone "a liar and plagarizer" just because you don't think the article looks like their original work. —Stormie 11:22, Jun 20, 2004 (UTC)
  • Two comments here:
    1. Please add comments to the discussion page (click 'discussion' at the top and edit there).
    2. There's no need to SHOUT at people and throw insults around, and doing so doesn't help put one's point of view across. Let's try to keep the discussion civil.
— Lady Lysine Ikinsile 22:57, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • My lord... I feel so childish... Thank you for your wise words Lady Lysine. Hopefully I can put The blue bombers hurtful words behind me. AmericanRobot 02:04, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • No need to feel childish, since that article is obviously a copyvio, in my opinion. Also, in my opinion it is better to bite a newcomer rather than having Wikipedia sued for copyright infringement. Cody The Blue Bomber 02:21, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: useless pseudoinformation. Wile E. Heresiarch 21:33, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

End discussion

June 16

Resistance Records — Discussion

Appears to be a front for www.resistance.com race-hate website. TPK 01:28, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Seems notable, a major propaganda division of the national alliance. Keep. At the very least should be merged with the main National Alliance page and left as a redirect. --68.57.44.65 01:33, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Yes it's a race hate record label - not grounds for deletion in itself. Secretlondon 02:22, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, list on cleanup, turn this into an actual article. As it is now, it's almost like giving them free publicity, sans criticism. -- Jmabel 03:28, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Record labels are encyclopedic, no matter what their politics. And I wouldn't call it "free publicity", any more than any of our other movie/music/book stubs are free publicity. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 13:11, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Very much keep! I've been looking for an article on this label, to fill out our coverage of neo-Nazis ... this is important because it makes bucks for the National Alliance. Could do with detail and cleanup, of course - David Gerard 14:45, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. DJ Clayworth 15:14, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Horribly unpleasant thought that such a thing exists at all, but exist it does. Keep. - Lucky 6.9 01:37, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Medi Legends — Discussion

  • Looks to be original fiction. -- Infrogmation 03:11, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Sounds about right. On that basis, delete -- Jmabel 03:30, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • Yup, the contributors user page states that it's original fiction. Also Medi World and Medipolis City. Delete all three. - TB 13:34, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment: Note the pretty(?) blue link to "Medi World." It's back. I posted it for speedy, another user posted a VfD notice instead and I listed it again farther down this page. FWIW, I'd like to see this guy banned for vandalism. - Lucky 6.9 02:24, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment number two: This guy has some big brass ones. He's also reinstated "Medipolis City!" Going to put the speed delete back on these. - Lucky 6.9 06:19, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Cody Barker — Discussion

  • Non-notable person. Only claim to fame is being best friends with Daryl F. Mallett, another page that should probably be deleted. -- SSherris 04:52, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • But he was born in (city) Utah! Delete all as blatant vanity. - Lucky 6.9 06:58, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Yup, vanity. Delete. Unusually early d.o.b. for an attention-seeket. - TB 13:31, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. DJ Clayworth 14:54, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Debate closed. By the time I got to this the page was already deleted. However for the record:

RESULT: 4 to delete, none to keep DELETED. DJ Clayworth 19:50, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Nail varnish impressions of stomata — Discussion

  • A "how-to". RickK 04:56, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
    • And you point is? Look there are lot's of how to's on how to are you planning on listing each one of them here individually? The plan was to transwiki them all to wikibooks, starting with the recipes ( but people have objected to even doing that) . But there is a lot to do, and past experience has shown that there is no consensus for deleting how to pages just because they aere how tos.theresa knott 11:33, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Stubby as is, but it could be expanded to be a full (if rather esoteric) article. - TB 13:27, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
    • And my point is, that howtos are not encyclopedia articles, and as Theresa said, the plan was to transwiki them to wikibooks. RickK 18:50, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • This information has long been part of the Stoma article, needlessly duplicates information and does so under an article name that is highly unlikely to be searched for. I would have recommended a redirect, but I seriously doubt anyone would search for "Nail varnish impressions of stomata," without first having looked up Stoma or Stomata (which redirects to Stoma). Delete. SWAdair | Talk 08:09, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Stoma. I have to once more insist that there has never been any consensus that how-tos do not belong in Wikipedia—or if there is nobody has ever been able to point me to any evidence of it. The title of Diderot's encyclopedia is "Encyclopædie, ou Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des métiers et des art" (Encyclopaedia, or a Systematic Dictionary of Science, Arts, and the Trades) and what was good enough for Diderot ought to be good enough for us. Dpbsmith 01:37, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: redundant w/ stoma, and not a title that people are going to search for. Since the part about making nail varnish impressions is pretty short, there's no need for a separate article. Wile E. Heresiarch 21:36, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Spirituality in The 21st Century — Discussion

  • Non-notable, as far as I can tell. -- Jmabel 05:07, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • This should be a speedy. I seem to remember this being deleted once before. - Lucky 6.9 06:56, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - can't find the phrase used elsewhere with this meaning and it doesn't stand up by itself as an article. - TB 13:24, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • Kurt Kawohl again, pushing his own version of Transcendentalism. Delete DJ Clayworth 14:50, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Slightly too long to be a dicdef, slightly too short to be a stub. While the premises made here might provoke an interesting conversation, this is nowhere close to what I would expect of an article. Denni☯ 22:25, 2004 Jun 20 (UTC)
  • Delete. Website advert which summarises the POV promoted by the website. Not remotely encyclopedic. Andrewa 11:03, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

This was deleted before I got to it.

RESULT: 6 to delete, none to keep. DELETED.

DJ Clayworth 19:50, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

List of exclamations used by Captain Haddock — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of exclamations used by Captain Haddock

Gr00by — Discussion

  • Vanity/unverifiable information, non-notable subject. Fredrik (talk) 11:36, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • 4 parts patent nonsense, 1 part vanity. Speedy delete - TB 13:20, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • Sounds about right. Speedy delete as patent nonsense. They had their laugh. - Lucky 6.9 16:16, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Ramsgate Flat Earth Society — Discussion

  • Utter nonsense. Delete and move to BJAODN. -- ALargeElk | Talk 11:48, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)


Regards Ramsgate Flat Earth Soc. page: No problem with your vote for deletion, except that you should offer proof it is a fantasy construct. Although I have very many other possible subjects to offer wikipedia, I do not hold that it should exclude fantasy, given some content like Star trek articles I have noted. If Fiction/Faction is not a legitimate subject here may I propose a request for some repository for such items under the heading of WikiNonsence for those of us that get our inspiration from such forms of research? Faedra 12:50, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC) All the best.

Fester, The Ramsgate Flat Earth Soc. prides itself on its record of disinfomation and utter nonscense, but is an officially recognised group in the archives of Ramsgate library list of Societies, (fact) its history is a matter for debate, perhaps the article should consist of facts related to its manifetation in the C20th. (fact).

I guess the difficulty is in that I have Wikified the item, as if it stood alone it would not register in any linked pages...?

Anti art (Dada) and anti music (punk rock) exist alongside the conventional arts, should not then Anti culture have a place in global knowledge data bases?

Does the Wikifairy really exist?

  • I would replace the gibberish with an article about said society .. if that is I could find any evidence that it really exists. As is, delete. - TB 13:18, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. This is not the place for this material. Rmhermen 14:14, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
  • The article itself says that it is a personal view of the cosmos by the author. That alone is enough for deletion. Wikipedia is not a forum for original research. Delete. DJ Clayworth 14:42, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I believe that the Wikifairy doesn't allow for original research and/or conjecture. Delete. - Lucky 6.9 16:07, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • The wikifairy certainly exists, though whether he will reveal himself as such here on VfD I know not. What I do know is that lucky 6.9 is correct. No original research allowed. (actually come to think of it when he makes the page dissapear from the wikipedia with a wave of his magic "delete this page" wand he will reveal himself) ;-) theresa knott 16:46, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • If the wikifairy finds original research, he steals your toes. It's in his contract. Delete. -- Cyrius|✎ 17:17, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Del. Fortunately or not, posting nonsense is not a crime, and there is no burden of proof requiring del-voters to prove it's nonsense. An advocate for retention of apparent nonsense needs to advance cogent evidence overcoming the appearance of nonsensicality, not blither incomprehensibly and mutter "Indeed sir and it's true sir and i never was given to lie/And if you'd been to Ramsgate, sir,/You'd've seen it as well as i". --Jerzy(t) 04:25, 2004 Jun 17 (UTC)

End Statement: It is at least reassuring the Wikifairy has such awesome powers! I can read the research of others with confidence in this knowledge, but assure you insane as it seems I was a member of the august fraternity under discussion, it was formed out of sheer frustration at beauacracy and resolved itself upon the quest for pure nonsense. It may not be useful to record this at the 'pedia but you have to try, how else can one be bold? Thanks for all the feedback. No more talk, send in the fairies and the elves to Del. Faedra

A Time for Choosing — Discussion

A Time for Choosing

Re-listing, because for some reason no action was taken after the vote in June, left unaltered below. RadicalSubversiv E 00:45, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

  • Source text of a speech. DJ Clayworth 16:41, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Summarize and wikibook. Or wikibook and then delete. --ssd 03:37, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: There have been a few of these lately. The speech has some political importance, in that it galvanized the far and moderate right wings of the GOP, but that can be covered in the article on Goldwater's 1964 campaign. Geogre 17:22, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Either keep, or redir to a Goldwater-related article. Don't delete. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 18:53, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Wikisource! That's what it is there for... speeches and such. Lyellin 11:00, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Wikisource & Delete --Tagishsimon
  • I'm not up on my Wikisource (place seems like a maze to me...), if some kind soul will place this in the appropriate place there, I'll delete the article (drop me a message) Oberiko 18:58, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. This was a pivotal speech that launched a political career.

MC

  • This is already listed on VfD/Old to be transwikied to wikisource. There is no need for another debate. - SimonP 00:53, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
  • There is no mystery here... this should not be re-voted on. The transwiki process is fairly easy and any editor can do it. I have merged the text with the existing wikisource:A Time for Choosing article, and edited our article to describe the speech, but without containing the entire source. This speech is very notable. -- Netoholic @ 05:20, 2004 Sep 29 (UTC)

My apologies, the removal of the VfD notice from the page left me rather confused. On another note, isn't the speech text still under copyright? RadicalSubversiv E 05:48, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Barefoot skiing — add to this discussion

  • Substub; all information in the article is already in "Water skiing." Geogre 16:03, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I've grown to hate substubs as of late. This wouldn't even make a good redirect. "Barefoot water skiing" makes more sense. Delete. - Lucky 6.9 16:09, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • As above. Delete Nick04 17:27, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • To much of the world, "Skiing" is what you do on snow. It is both extremely difficult and extermely uncomfortable to do in bare feet - it's really hard to get a good edge, for instance. I understand, however, that barefoot waterskiing is a fairly popular demonstration sport. Either rename this stub or delete it. Denni☯ 17:45, 2004 Jun 17 (UTC)
  • Keep stub. Evolving and legitimate water sport - particularly in Australia and Southern/Midwestern U.S. Davodd 04:50, Jun 20, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. It will eventually be an article. The name is correct, the sport is just called barefoot skiing, I agree barefoot water skiing would make more sense but it's not our job to reform the language. It surprised me too when I first heard it. Don't try it in the snow unless you have very long thin feet, with cracked metal edges preferably. (;-> Andrewa 11:12, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • You mean this is real? Shet mah mouf. Keep and expand if this is. - Lucky 6.9 20:49, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Fairy cake — add to this discussion

  • Delete - recipe only - only text is ingredients and method - Tεxτurε 20:07, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Should be moved to the Cookbook at Wikibooks Krik 21:12, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, although I think this survived before. Gentgeen 08:35, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hamburger Earmuffs — add to this discussion

  • this was a plot element in a Simpsons episode that lasted all of five seconds. We could fill an entire alternate Wikipedia with this stuff. Brithgob 16:32, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Merge with the appropriate episode article and delete. Johnleemk | Talk 11:18, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Merged and deleted. Oberiko 19:12, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

June 17

Indecent assault — add to this discussion

  • Worthless article. --ssd 03:30, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • In its current condition, I agree. Shouldn't be too much trouble for someone who knows the subject to bump it up to at least a full paragraph though. -Sean Curtin 04:24, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. It's stubbish, and should probably go to cleanup, but there's no question of the significance of the topic. Denni☯ 17:52, 2004 Jun 17 (UTC)
  • Give cleanup a shot at it. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:24, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

List of counties and perishes according to the part of the state they are in — add to this discussion

Albert Gesner — add to this discussion

please delete page due to incorrect name, see Abraham Gesner (this unsigned request was posted by JillandJack. SWAdair | Talk 03:42, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC))

  • I agree with this, as redirect would be worse than useless. DJ Clayworth 16:19, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete harmful redirect. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:20, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Off-by-one error — Discussion

Off-by-one error is largely a FOLDOC stub. In the time since it's been there, someone created a duplicate article at off by one error. The title with the hyphens is the better title, but the article without the hyphens is by far the better article. Since "merging" the two would consist almost entirely of taking the contents of off by one error and pasting them over the current contents of off-by-one error, the best solution IMO is to delete off-by-one error (the FOLDOC import) and then do a history-preserving move of off by one error to its location. Summary: delete the one with hyphens, and move the one without hyphens into its current location. --Delirium 08:31, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

  • Why not do a three way move? Move o-b-o to some temp location. Move o b o to o-b-o. Then move from the temp location to o b o. 4.63.108.33
    • Why not? Because we don't want to keep the current contents of o-b-o. I agree - delete o-b-o, then move o b o to o-b-o, keeping a redirect in place. -- pne 15:09, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I don't care how it's accomplished, just get o b o to the o-b-o title and remove the redundant article, whether it's by deletion or redirection. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:17, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect. More work needs to be done on this page to distinguish it from fencepost error (which is a specific type of obo error). - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 20:50, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Deleted o-b-o, moved o_b_o to it's place. Oberiko 19:17, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Etymology of Al-Andalus — Discussion

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Etymology of Al-Andalus

Fabien Chéreau — Discussion

Author of some open-source planetarium software, not much else notable that I can see. - TB 12:42, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete, just some guy. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:15, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

David hayes — Discussion

Unnotable part-time guitar player, possibly vanity. - TB 12:42, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

  • google "David hayes" guitarist benfleet = 0 hits. Vanity. Delete. DJ Clayworth 16:16, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • delete. - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 17:56, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: If nothing else, a notable David Hayes would probably have a capital letter beginning his surname. The name is very common, so a search for verification is difficult when the article doesn't supply enough rationale. Geogre 13:58, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Quickly. Painfully. - Lucky 6.9 17:49, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Nutritional nicotine detoxification — Discussion

This article seems to give medical advice on how certain nutrients can help you quit smoking. It is linked to from only two pages: Smoking cessation and User:Topbanana/Reports/This page contains no links.

It looks like a laundry list to me—something I might expect to find on a health advice site but not necessarily in an encyclopædia. -- pne 14:32, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete unless expanded into an article by deadline. DJ Clayworth 16:14, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. While the individual ingredients on this list may do as the description claims, there is no reason to believe (especially as no medical sources have been cited) that they will "cleanse" the body of nicotine, and there is not even a mention of the primary problem of addiction. As far as that goes, nicotine is the least of a smoker's worries. Nicotine, other than being quite addictive, is a relatively benign substance. It's all those other ingredients in smoke and chew tobacco that cause the grief. Denni☯ 18:05, 2004 Jun 17 (UTC)
  • Delete. I don't believe a list of home remedies is quite appropriate for Wikipedia. Joyous 19:29, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

Yim Byung Nam — Discussion

Not encyclopædic. Vanity article on some random person who achieved a place in the Guinness Book of Records, as have many tens (hundreds?) of thousands of others.

This "feat" was linked to from Metal, 1998, and Guinness Book of Records; I've since removed it from all of them. There are no pages linking to this article any more. -- pne 14:33, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Wikipedia is not the Guinness Book of Records. Delete. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:12, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Ow. Ow ow ow ow ow. Still, though, big deal. Delete. DS 02:28, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

"Mad Crowd" Disease — Discussion

Hopelessly POV, somewhat (OK, very) incoherent. IMO, Wikipedia is not the place for paranoid rants from either the right wing or the left.Dukeofomnium 15:43, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Author is very new to Wikipedia. Probably will have to be deleted, but at least let's give them a chance to rescue this. DJ Clayworth 16:10, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I don't know what you mean by "rescue this". Does that mean that you think there is anything there that is worth rescuing? I would appreciate your ideas, thank you. Paxdora
  • It's well-written (damning it with faint praise) but it's still a POV rant. Give it the five days to get straightened up and to be made encyclopedic. If not, delete. - Lucky 6.9 16:53, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: The rest of the web is home to personal home pages, online journalism, blogging. This article is based on a neologism and then offers up an essay. When I want political essays, I read The Nation online rather than an encyclopedia. I don't mean to be snippy, and it's not nonsense or evil or bad or anything, but it sure seems out of place in an encyclopedia. Geogre 17:56, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Being of the same mind, ie, that corporations are mindless eating machines with no social conscience, I can find resonance with this article. Unfortunately, while it would earn ching!s big-time at E2, it is too POV here. It has every potential to be a strong article if the author can take it from rant to researched article. Delete if this cannot be done. Denni☯ 18:14, 2004 Jun 17 (UTC)
  • Delete, ranting raving POV, neologism, not encyclopedic. Joyous 19:42, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

It's a copyvio. See [16]. I've listed it on Copyright problems. RickK 19:40, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

You are very wrong, RickK. You offer NO PROOF of copyright violation by simply referring to a Google search page showing the words "corporate crowd". Is that phrase copyrighted by anyone? Then please do cite the source. My article was an entirely original work suggesting that the so-called "corporate crowd" mentioned by Paul O'Neill should be called the "mad crowd". So what, exactly, is your case??? User:Paxdora 11:19 pm

It seems to me that the quotation cited as a copyright violation is within the grounds of fair use. Of course, the original article would go on VfD for being a POV screed anyways. -Sean Curtin 12:30, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I have no opinion yet on whether this should be deleted, but I don't see that anything in the link RickK provided shows a copyvio. older≠wiser 03:38, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
I agree with what older≠wiser says. I searched but could not find a copy vio. I am sorry, but I cannot find anything in that article that remotely resembles a copyright violation. There are no whole blocks of text copied from some source. The debate over whether or not it can go in the encyclopedia should not be clouded by this false claim. In addition, it is obivious you probably did not check those urls on the google search, as several of them are 404's. Burgundavia 04:48, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
Yes, there are factual similarities, but no actual copies. By that standard, every encyclopedia is a copy of the 1st. However, aside from that, I did a very careful search with about a dozen randomly selected sentences from the article and I cannot find even something that remotely resembles a copy vio. Nothing, not even a hint. Burgundavia 04:54, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

The allegation does seem a bit weak/reckless from just appearances.. if someone thinks a contribution is a copyvio, then you should be able to identify at least one or two specifc places that a posting apparently included material from improperly, or that are substantially similar. Linking to a google search makes the allegation seem very vague, difficult to evaluate or defend against, and perhaps more malicious than fair. Who's going to actually read all the search results to try and find which site is supposedly infringed? How can you argue about a google search with 40+ hits, that none of the results have any similar content at all, without reading each of them? -- Mysidia 20:28, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete essay whether or not it's a copyvio. It's not an encyclopedia article, and the term's a personal neologism. -- Cyrius|✎ 06:47, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Is not copyvio. Is POV. Is personal essay. Is neologism. Is delete. -Sean Curtin 12:37, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • It is not a personal neologism. The term Mad Crowd Disease has been coined and published on the Internet and is currently being used as the name for a punk rock band (in the U.K., I believe). Paxdora 6/18/04

Using a segment or sentence from a newspaper article, whether copied verbatim or modified, in order to create a new, original essay is NOT a copyright infringement, but a perfect example of lawful "Fair Use". Read the statute and learn something important about democracy and free speech - while it still remains in America, that is.

Copyright & Fair Use http://www.usg.edu/admin/legal/copyright/

Fair Use Statute, 17 U.S.C. § 107:

3rd proposition of "fair use" principles the ultimate test for educational fair use is whether the copying is done for sound pedagogical reasons and not simply to avoid purchasing a work

Fair use is derivative of copyright.

Fair use modifies the marketing monopoly of the copyright holder so that copyright can fulfill its constitutional purpose of promoting learning.

Fair use normally entails copying and is of three kinds:

a. Creative fair use by authors who copy from other works to create their own work.

b. Personal fair use by individuals who copy from works for their own learning or entertainment.

c. Educational fair use by teachers, scholars, and students who copy for teaching, scholarship, or learning.

Attempts to limit the fair use right with quantitative guidelines are without statutory authority.

The legal effect of quantitative guidelines is to provide a safe-harbor, i.e., copying within the guideline limits automatically qualifies as fair use. Such guidelines do not, and cannot legally, mean that copying in excess of the guidelines is infringement and not fair use.

Paxdora 6/18/04 8:56 am

  • Regardless of copyright, this is a POV rant, not an encyclopedic article. Delete. Rossami 17:28, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - POV rant - Tεxτurε 06:27, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, not encyclopedia material. —Stormie 11:14, Jun 20, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: personal essay. FWIW there's no evidence it's a copyvio. Wile E. Heresiarch 19:24, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Regardless of copyright and neologism concerns, this is a POV rant. Delete, delete, delete. --dcf 13:09, 2004 Jun 21 (UTC)

THIS DISCUSSION IS CLOSED.

Since the author has strongly objected to allegation of copyright violation it is hereby recorded that the reasons for deletion are not copyright violation. Ignoring those who considered copyright to be an issue, the vote is still 8 in favour of deletion, none against. Deleted. DJ Clayworth 20:48, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Credits — Discussion

What is this? I don't quite understand it and it doesn't seem like patent nonsense, so listing here. Thue 15:46, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Seems like Italian patent nonsense to me.  :^) Speedy delete, if posible. - Lucky 6.9 16:30, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • The anonymous author 192.167.218.12 appears to be using it as a sources page for the article Plant improvement. There's only one author here, we can merge and delete without destroying author credit. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:07, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Move content then delete. Except for the one link from Plant improvement, "what links here" turns up "credits" in the context of movie credits. Better a red link than this confusion. Rossami 19:59, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Mindaugas Indriunas — Discussion

Vanity page. Thue 16:16, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete vanity. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:02, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I concur: this is a vanity page. Please delete. -- Mud 15:31, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Why did Hitler attack the Soviet Union — Discussion

Reads like a philosophy or history text. Author even asks to "discuss" the different paragraphs. Conjecture or...? - Lucky 6.9 16:27, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete. The title is inherently opinionated. Wiki is not the place for theories. blankfaze | •­• 16:33, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: I think I see what the author was trying. I think he or she was attempting to list all the theories offered up by historians as to why Hitler launched his attack (and "Discuss" is probably "Discussion"), but the lemma of the article is too cumbersome, and the article isn't particularly scholarly. Better would be "According to Marxist historians such as ...." for each of these things, and better still would be the whole thing put into an article in the WW2 tree. Geogre 18:02, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, under a neutral title. Nikola 18:19, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Some info should be and cleaned up, but belongs under a different title. (Not sure which, atm) -- siroxo 02:36, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • This orphaned article reads like a personal essay. Keep if 1) moved to a more encyclopedic title, 2) turned into an article that references published scholarly studies on this topic and 3) linked in to the WWII series. Rossami 02:00, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Article titles probably shouldn't be in the form of questions, and articles themselves shouldn't be written like history class handouts. Any information we want to keep should probably we copied to WWII or another appropriate topic. -Seth Mahoney 21:37, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, under something expanded like "World War II German-Soviet Relations" or somesuch. It could grow. Jxg 02:34, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Unless and until this article is edited into something that's deserving of an independent page, there's no reason to keep it. Acegikmo1 17:04, Jun 20, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. this should be already discussed in World War II/History of Germany. It doesnt deserve its own article. --Jiang 17:06, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

====Lennie lee==== and Lennie Lee — add to this discussion

  • One Google hit. Non-notable, IMO. - Lucky 6.9 16:38, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Personal promotion. Delete. -- 20:46, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Vanity page, please delete. -- Mud 17:21, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

====The DHSS==== — add to this discussion

  • Lennie Lee's artist collective. Zero Google hits. - Lucky 6.9 16:47, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

====Dirty tricks==== — add to this discussion

Irrelevant, almost a dictionary definition of a common language construct. Linked to by only 4 pages (not counting a user page). (dictionary link: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dirty+tricks&r=67) cbraga 17:13, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

  • Keep: I'm really on the fence, but Segretti and the "rat fuckers" are a notable thing, in that they were officially called dirty tricks by the CREEP. Lee Atwater was only accused of replicating the same tactics (although he literally had a deathbed confession and plea for forgiveness). Karl Rove has constantly been, again, accused of using Nixonian dirty tricks. The article needs NPOV and a more dispassionate rationale, placing it in the historical (and specific) moment. Geogre 18:13, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Dirty tricks - Well known political phenomenon with 282,000 hits on google. *NOT* something you are likely to find in a dictionary. Keep. →Raul654 18:30, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete or at least move -- very general term. Ilyanep 22:06, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Not a well-defined term at all. That is not a reason for deletion, but its not a good article as it stands. More examples would serve it well. I abstain from voting though. -- siroxo 02:43, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. This article is needed to explain just what Nixon's "dirty tricks" were, and to disambiguate the term as used more generally. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:56, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Article is not very useful as it stands: needs a lot of work, but has potential. (Unless we already have a better article elsewhere on the topic, in which case merge and redirect.) -- Jmabel 18:49, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Redirect to subterfuge because dirty tricks are not unique to politics or elections. The article should address the general meaning, not merely a political subset. Rossami 03:19, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Linux tips — Discussion

Wikipedia is not a usage guide. Thue 17:17, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Agreed. Delete, the material is more appropriate and covered much better elsewhere. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:43, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Agree, delete. Ilyanep 22:04, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Merge into Wikibooks? Krik 23:18, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. DJ Clayworth 19:13, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - not enough to wikibook. just delete - Tεxτurε 06:26, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Tom ash — Discussion

Vanity page. Thue 17:28, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Looked more like rambling kiddie-wiki to me, which is why I voted for a speedy. One way or another, delete. - Lucky 6.9 17:51, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • If you read the whole thing, you'll see that he's just a little confused, a new user who puts his personal information in articlespace instead of userspace. Has happened before. Yes, delete, but can we get him on the right track? Page history shows this kid has had plenty of opportunities to get his jam together. Delete. Denni☯ 18:26, 2004 Jun 17 (UTC)
  • Delete vanity page. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:44, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Airpoints — Discussion

One line advert --Tagishsimon

Delete. I've made their link non-wikied so as not to increase their PageRank during their week on VFD. I thought these spam entries were speedy candidates... - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 17:54, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete ad. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:42, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete advertisement. --Marlowe 02:32, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Advertisement. Delete. DJ Clayworth 19:11, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete ad. Andris 04:45, Jun 20, 2004 (UTC)

Alan Glanz — add to this discussion

  • Nonsense. No google hits AFAIK for Alan Glanz in this context. Vlad Tepes = dracula = 1400s? Not 240AD. --Tagishsimon
  • Patent nonsense at that. Almost BJAODN. - Lucky 6.9 17:53, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • The Alans were certainly a real people, and we have to consider the possibility of alternate spellings of the name, but the mention of Vlad Tepes does suggest it's nonsense. Delete, I suppose. Everyking 19:28, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: It's very funny. The empire of the Alans? ("And this is Alan of the Anatomy Department"). I wonder how a kingdom can be forgotten and yet have an entry here. Geogre 18:07, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Manuel Manuedda — Discussion

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 speedily deleted per CSD A7 - no assertion of notability. FCYTravis 21:35, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Manuel Manuedda

Was previously deleted over a year ago. Still only gets four Google hits, one of which is the wikipedia deleteion log.

Not sure if I'm treating this correctly or not. If not, somebody clean it up for me. --GraemeL (talk) 17:00, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Previous VfD:

Seems non-notable. No google hits. Wikipedia is not a vanity press. Remember to remove from 1988 births. Thue 18:06, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete vanity. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:41, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Absolutely delete as vanity. - Lucky 6.9 22:14, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. No one younger than me should have their own entry. What, that's not a valid reason? Fine, delete for vanity. --Marlowe 23:37, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)
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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

Pixomatic — Discussion

Mimsie 18:25, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • The page is gone for now (for copyright) but if it was not in violatin of copyright, it sure sounded like an ad. Mimsie 20:53, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • I removed the text as it was copyvioed, but people can look at the history to see the original spammy content if they want. - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 23:07, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

Array slicing — Discussion

No meaningful content, merely a mcguffin for a link back to an obscure project = next best thing to an ad. --Tagishsimon

  • Sorted, should be kept. --Tagishsimon
  • Ad. Slicing is a real operation on arrays, supported by some programming languages. Should perhaps be mentioned in that article, but I'm not sure where. Redirect or delete. Fredrik (talk) 20:46, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I rearranged it a bit, so now I think it is a harmless stub that should kept. Though if anyone has a good place to redirect or consolidate the content to they are most welcome to do so :). Thue 22:22, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • It's very vague right now, dicdeffy. I'm not the most familiar with what exactly it is, but someone who is should expand it to more of a discription of how exactly it works. If its a general term, then explain what it can mean. If this can be done, keep, if not, merge info into array -- siroxo 02:27, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Expanded. Keep. Dysprosia 03:19, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep new version - good rescue, guys. - TB 10:04, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

Trinity Grammar School.vic and Trinity Grammar School — Discussion

High school articles may be debatable, but, as far as I know, the general consensus is that average elementary school articles are not warranted. (not to mention odd title) Niteowlneils 18:44, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Definitely delete .vic, it's a super-substub copy/paste job at a terrible name. Unfortunately for us deletionists, Trinity Grammar School is (in part) a high school. The school runs from pre-kindergarten all the way to high school graduation. [17] [18]. The article's based largely on the chronology at [19]. Note that there's another similar school with the same name in New South Wales [20]. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:35, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, but send to cleanup, although I agree, it's a terrible article (and damn, I hate this school). It's one of the more notable schools in Melbourne, and I suspect that we'd have articles on many of their alumni (I just checked their site to see if I could find a list of alumni, but there doesn't appear to be one on there). I think it wasn't too far off being targeted by WikiProjectMelbourne anyway. Note to our friends overseas: Grammar schools in Australia are not elementary schools, but are typically either K-12 or high schools. Ambivalenthysteria 06:12, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • I've turned it into a half-decent stub, so no more unwikified mess. How about keeping it now? I might do a bit more research and give it more of a workover if it survives VFD. Ambivalenthysteria 09:38, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Franjo Liklin — add to this discussion

  • Title has nothing to do with article, and we already have a List of Croats. RickK 19:16, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Looks like a copy/paste move of List of Croats. Delete. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:40, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Move then delete. --[[User:Destinova|Marlowe²]] 03:25, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - I failed to find enough english-language material on this Croatian folk singer to even manage a stub. - TB
  • Delete speedily. The page title and content don't match, and the content already exists elsewhere. --Shallot 14:27, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Zong of the week — Discussion

Single sentence advert --Tagishsimon

  • Delete. I've nowiki'd the links to prevent pagerank spam. - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 20:32, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete spam. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:38, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Zong it...I mean, delete it as spam. - Lucky 6.9 20:49, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete the spam. --Marlowe 22:49, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Spam. DJ Clayworth 19:09, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Maria Boniecka — Discussion

There's no reason to have this--it's only content is "I'll translate this soon", and it's been up since april. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 20:30, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

  • Consider it an untranslated page over its time limit and delete. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:39, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Even a very infrequent updater could update faster than this. --Marlowe 22:18, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - she seems to be a notable Polish political author with at least 5 published books. I've added a little more info to make at least a basic stub. - TB 10:20, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • It's now an OK stub. Maybe request full translation at Wikipedia:Translation into English? -- Jmabel 18:53, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. — Lady Lysine Ikinsile 21:45, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

Extreme Performance — Discussion

  • More from the Lennie Lee camp. - Lucky 6.9 21:08, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Unless this is a created or invented movement - it should be kept. It is badly written and needs clean up otherwise. --Oldak Quill 21:18, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • No Google hits for "Extreme Performance," at least none relating to this group. No hits for "Extreme Performance lenny lee." There have been a lot of these suspect articles cropping up today that mention this guy. - Lucky 6.9 22:11, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Obviously it's some sort of Lenny Lee fan making these additions, but I've heard much about the authenticity of these "extreme performances". This page should definitely added upon though. If you're looking for proof these types of performances exist, check out GG Allen. --Marlowe 22:53, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

By the grace of God, I'll remember my sig one of these days. --Marlowe 22:53, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

  • LOL! That you, Marlowe? - Lucky 6.9 22:59, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Unsigned votes don't count, my friend. And I've never said the performer/performances don't exist. There is simply no substantial proof and Wikipedia entries require a degree of notability. - Lucky 6.9 22:40, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment: I checked "Extreme Performance Lennie Lee" when I realized I misspelled the name. Three hits, one of which goes back to the guy's own site. Other two are not exact matches. - Lucky 6.9 22:57, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • I added a note about an almost verbatim version of the same thing at Extreme Performance Art. If one goes, the other should, or vice versa. Looks like self-promotion to me. --Lexor|Talk
  • Keep Extreme Performance Art. I've redirected Extreme Performance to the former. Although these articles were originally written as promo material for Lennie Lee and Zhu Yu, the term is more widely applicable. I've struck out the promo links & what's left is a reasonable stub. Wile E. Heresiarch 15:53, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
    • Well done, Wile. That's what I call "extreme performance"! Denni☯ 22:46, 2004 Jun 20 (UTC)
      • Oh, I don't really deserve much credit. The article already had the historical stuff; I just erased a couple of promo links and put in a link for the Jim Rose Circus. Wile E. Heresiarch 04:31, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Looking good. In fact, Our Lennie added himself to the legitimate "Extreme Performance Art" page. Keep new and useful redirect. - Lucky 6.9 16:25, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Extreme performance art has been growing since the early 1960's. Recently there was a programme on extreme Chinese performance art by critic Waldemar Januszak watched by around one million people (a lot for a documentary). One of the artists Zhu Yu was described as the Damien Hirst of the Chinese art scene. He is well known throughout the world for eating a human foetus as art. The Chinese government had a meeting to discuss extreme performance art whih they see as a political threat

This section describes how to list articles and their associated talk pages for deletion. For pages that are not articles, list them at other appropriate deletion venues or use copyright violation where applicable. As well, note that deletion may not be needed for problems such as pages written in foreign languages, duplicate pages, and other cases. Use Wikipedia:Proposed mergers for discussion of mergers.

Only a registered, logged-in user can complete steps II and III. (Autoconfirmed registered users can also use the Twinkle tool to make nominations.) If you are unregistered, you should complete step I, note the justification for deletion on the article's talk page, then post a message at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion requesting that someone else complete the process.

You must sign in to nominate pages for deletion. If you do not sign-in, or you edit anonymously, you will get stuck part way through the nomination procedure.

I – Put the deletion tag on the article.
  • Insert {{subst:afd1}} at the top of the article. Do not mark the edit as minor.
    If this article has been nominated before, use {{subst:afdx|2nd}} or {{subst:afdx|3rd}} etc.
  • Include in the edit summary AfD: Nominated for deletion; see [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NominationName]]. replacing NominationName with the name of the page being nominated. Publish the page.
    The NominationName is normally the article name (PageName), but if it has been nominated before, use "PageName (2nd nomination)" or "PageName (3rd nomination)" etc.)
II – Create the article's deletion discussion page.

The resulting AfD box at the top of the article should contain a link to "Preloaded debate" in the AfD page. Click that link to open the article's deletion discussion page for editing. Some text and instructions will appear.

You can do it manually as well:

  • Click the link saying "deletion discussion page" to open the deletion-debate page.
  • Insert this text:
    {{subst:afd2 | pg=PageName | cat=Category | text=Why the page should be deleted}} ~~~~
    Replace PageName with the name of the page, Category with a letter from the list M, O, B, S, W, G, T, F, and P to categorize the debate, and Why the page should be deleted with the reasons the page should be deleted.
  • If appropriate, inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "deletion sorting lists". Then add a {{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.
  • Use an edit summary such as Creating deletion discussion for [[PageName]]. Publish the page.
III – Notify users who monitor AfD discussions.
  • Open the articles for deletion log page for editing.
  • At the top of the list on the log page (there's a comment indicating the spot), insert:{{subst:afd3 | pg=NominationName}}
    Replace NominationName appropriately (use "PageName", "PageName (2nd nomination)", etc.)
  • Link to the discussion page in your edit summary: Adding [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NominationName]]. Publish the page.
  • Consider letting the authors know on their talk page by adding: {{subst:Afd notice|Page name}} ~~~~
    If this is not the first nomination, add a second parameter with the NominationName (use "PageName (2nd nomination)" etc.): {{subst:Afd notice|PageName|NominationName}} ~~~~

[[fr:Wikip&eacute;dia:Pages &agrave; supprimer]] [[sv:Wikipedia:Sidor som b&ouml;r raderas]] [[zh:Wikipedia:&#21024;&#38500;&#25237;&#31080;&#21644;&#35831;&#27714

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/archive_September_2004&oldid=4144509"