Jump to content

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/archive May 2004

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kimiko (talk | contribs) at 12:37, 14 April 2003. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Add links to unwanted page titles to the list below so an administrator can find them and check whether or not they should be deleted.

Please review Wikipedia policy on permanent deletion of pages before adding to this page. If the page should be deleted, an admin will do so, and the link will be removed from this page (it will show up on the Wikipedia:Deletion log). If the page should not be deleted, someone will remove the link from this page. Page titles should stay listed for a minimum of a week before a decision is made.

As a general rule, don't delete pages you nominate for deletion. Let someone else do it.

In many cases, a page does not need to be deleted. In particular, do not add page titles of stubs that at least have a decent definition and might in the future become articles. There's no reason to delete those (see Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub). Also, please don't list pages that can easily and sensibly be redirected to another page. E.g., a page called Hume can be redirected to David Hume; presidant (a misspelling) can be redirected to president; etc. Even misspellings can be caught by search engines and provide Wikipedia perfectly relevant traffic! Similarly, pages in the wrong namespace (for example, user pages in the main namespace), can be redirected and should not be deleted if there are still old links to them.

Please sign any suggestion for deletion (use four tildes, ~~~~, to sign with your user name and the current date).

If you wish to delete subpages in your own user space, use Wikipedia:Personal subpages to be deleted

NOTE to Wiki Administrators: Simply deleting a page does not automatically delete its talk page or any subpages. Please delete these pages first, and then the main page. Also, if you delete a page, remove it from this list as well.

If another solution has been found for some of these pages than deletion, leave them listed for a short while, so the original poster can see why it wasn't deleted, and what did happen to it. This will prevent reposting of the same item.


See also:

  • Image:Rachelcorrie.jpg
  • Image:Rachelcorrie.JPG
  • Image:Rachelcorriebull.jpg
  • Image:Rachelcorrieport.jpg
    • Unnecessary images Martin 22:35 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)
    • These four were removed from votes for deletion without an explanation, presumably by accident, so I'd like to re-request their deletion. Martin 10:08 Apr 8, 2003 (UTC)
    • These four were removed from the list by Tim Starling with the comment removed the four redundant, orphan images of Rachel Corrie. That's an accurate description of these four images, but I note that the images still exist. I believe the difficulty may be in deleting the image not the page - someone needs to click the "del" link rather than "Delete this page". Martin 08:54 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
  • Micuparis does not survive the google test (I only found links to www.micuparis.net). Seems to be self promotion only by User:Bugmafia. -- mkrohn 09:55 Apr 1, 2003 (UTC)
I found two that didn't link to that site, but googling for Bucharest + "Little Paris" got 418 hits. It seems to be a legitmate nickname. Whether it merits an article is a seperate question. --Infrogmation 18:58 Apr 2, 2003 (UTC)
I checked the two links you mentioned and they seem to be the name of some city guide. Apart from that and the selfpromotion of User:Bugmafia there is no mention of "micuparis" at all, not even a single hit on google groups! Please don't get me wrong: I like the current version and find it interesting but would feel better if this material is integrated into the article about Romania. At the moment we don't have any evidence that this word is used at all, therefore I suggest deleting the article. -- mkrohn 22:28 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)
I've redirected it to Romania, because we definately don't need a seperate article on a nickname. However, given the failure of the google test, I support deletion. Martin 09:14 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
  • List of people named Fred. -- goatasaur
    • Hear, hear. This sort of rubbish gives wiki a bad name. We really have gone overboard with pointless ridiculous lists lately. What next [[Lists of Left Handed People From Montana with a Nose Piercing]] STÓD/ÉÍRE 00:26 Apr 3, 2003 (UTC)
    • It's a bit like (a portion of) Biographical Listing/F, except that it is by first name. It can be useful for people who are at least as well known by their first name as by their last. And the usefulness of such lists have increased since the search facility of wikipedia is often disabled. However, I deleted names without any info about the person (neither in the list nor through a link) - Patrick 15:57 Apr 3, 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree with STÓD/ÉÍRE: it looks more like a (tongue-in-cheek) joke than a portion of the biographical listing. -- Tim Starling 03:57 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
    • moved to Fred and turned into a disambiguation page - no need to delete Martin 09:18 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
  • Hail to the Thief and St. Anger
    • Both seem to be by User:Michael who is banned. Speculation about albums not yet released. No real info in either article (neither could there be seeing as they're not out yet). And the dates look wrong as well (June 10 is a Tuesday). --Camembert
      • Hail to the Thief is Radiohead's new album [1]. St. Anger is Metallica's newest album, which is (I think) a live album due to be released on DVD also [2]. -- goatasaur
      • I know that, but neither of them are out yet. They might not come out for months after their due date, or change names before being released, or even not appear at all. --Camembert
    • Hail to the Thief seems not massively unreasonable to me, since it at least has a track listing and a reference, but I deleted the one line of St. Anger.
  • Newb tests -- Notheruser 21:45 Apr 4, 2003 (UTC)
    • Dobeles county
      • What's wrong with this page? Why did WojPob delete it? -- JeLuF 08:14 Apr 6, 2003 (UTC)
        • I'm not sure what's wrong with the page (after reviewing it). I listed it because it had been blanked. -- Notheruser 01:31 Apr 13, 2003 (UTC)
    • It's been copied from http://www.dobele.lv. If that's why WojPob blanked it, it would have been nice of him to explain his reasoning somewhere. I'll put up a boilerplate copyright infringement notice, then we can wait for a week and delete it. -- Tim Starling 03:24 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
  • Heisei emperor - The title of this redirect is rude, for in current convention the era name will be used as his posthumous name. Nanshu 02:17 Apr 5, 2003 (UTC)
    • If this is seriously offensive, it should be deleted. Would it be less offensive if it were a redirect to Heisei rather than Akihito? -- Tim Starling 07:46 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
  • Brg StaySafe - poorly written and a google search failed to return any hits (besides wikipedia and acapedia). -- Notheruser 03:46 Apr 5, 2003 (UTC)
just check the software webiste that still has yet to provide an English version. The poorly written page is being rewritten on Wangame Studios based on info from the Chinese version. The title Brg StaySafe cannot be found anywhere on the site and should be removed from wiki unless the original poster provides a proper title naming. kt2
  • CGSR - possible copyright violation -- John Owens 20:11 Apr 7, 2003 (UTC)
  • Suppes speculation (and Suppes Speculation): this is odd hypothetical physics, by someone who admits it hasn't been published anywhere except the Wikipedia. Vicki Rosenzweig 22:14 Apr 7, 2003 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure, but I think autodynamics might fit into the same category. Any "real" physicists familiar with this particular relativity alternative? -- John Owens 13:42 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)
    • The topic of autodynamics has cropped up from time to time on the newsgroup sci.physics. As far as I am aware it has not ever been published in a peer reviewed journal. The policy is only established scientific theories so I vote for deletion. If we allow every alternative theory we will be overwhelmed with crackpot ideas. Theresa knott 13:24 Apr 12, 2003 (UTC)
  • Images of Rachel Corrie
    • It was on here a while ago and removed unilaterally. The shrine still exists, the hagiography continues, and it's tiresome. Vote to delete. Danny 11:25 Apr 8, 2003 (UTC)
      • I vote to delete as well, we have a biography already. -◈¡◈
    • Again, detailed talk at Talk:Images of Rachel Corrie
    • According to our policy, if this page is deemed to be unnecessary it should be redirected to Rachel Corrie rather than deleted. Martin 11:32 Apr 8, 2003 (UTC)
    • The issue isn't the current name, it is the actual existence of this POV shrine. No renaming will solve that issue.
    • It would really help if we avoided rehashing the same arguments if people discussed this at Talk:Images of Rachel Corrie rather than cluttering up this page with the debate.
    • Actually, whenever that is done, the page mysteriously disappears of the Votes for deletion page and so nothing happens. We have discussed the issue to death there and still this page lingers on. So leave it here and please please make a decision to get rid of this nonsensical POV shrine. STÓD/ÉÍRE 21:17 Apr 8, 2003 (UTC)
    • This page is now a redirect to Rachel Corrie so it is no longer the rather cringe-inducing shrine it once was. STÓD/ÉÍRE 01:13 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)
    • Nothing mysterious - I removed it before because this page is called votes for deletion, not votes for redirection. Martin
  • Adaptation. (Notice period within page name.)
    • Text exists within Adaptation. Seems to have been a typo when creating the page. Jketola 18:30 Apr 8, 2003 (UTC)
    • so redirect it.
  • Oliver Lawson - Nonsense article -- RTC 20:34 Apr 8, 2003 (UTC)
    • Oliver Lawson - It could be about a fictional character, in which case that should be made clear; or it could be someone's way of anonymously mocking a friend, cow-orker, or whatever. -- John Owens 22:28 Apr 8, 2003 (UTC)
    • It was created by a person (217.39.18.16) that vandalized Baghdad airport and after that was reverted, it now is linked to by nothing. -- RTC 07:09 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)
  • George Washington/List of albums - from repeatedly banned user Michael/Weezer/George Washington -- Infrogmation 23:53 Apr 8, 2003 (UTC)
    • You are the weakest and by far the most annoying link, Michael. Goodbye. STÓD/ÉÍRE 01:13 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)
    • On the other hand, it's kind of handy to have a list available to us of which articles are going to need to be repaired next. <g> -- John Owens 05:55 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)
  • Lonnie Frisbee needs either some serious NPOV work, or deletion. Having never heard of this (alleged) person, it's hard to tell which. But it can't stay as is, either way. -- John Owens 05:52 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)
    • Google search seems to indicate this is a real person. Nevertheless, I still think that deleting is not a bad idea, since NPOVing will mean 'rewriting' in this case anyway, so it's even less useful than a copyright violation. Andre Engels 10:56 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)
  • Similarly Critique of Dialectical Reason, about Georg Hegel's work, even though he couldn't be bothered to link to Hegel. :p Very POV, basically says it's a piece of crap, and any such critique should probably just go on the Hegel article anyway, or perhaps dialectical reason. -- John Owens 20:40 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)
  • Laurent: created with a badly choosen name, now moved and disambiguated. -- looxix 19:17 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)
  • Astrid: created with a badly choosen name, now moved and disambiguated. -- looxix 19:17 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)
    • valid disambiguation page - please keep
  • Image:Persepolis.jpg was labeled "With permission, only for personal usage from traveladventures"; I don't think Wikipedia counts as "personal usage", does it? Boilerplate in place. -- John Owens 21:54 Apr 10, 2003 (UTC)
  • Revenge, contain just "Arguably, a basis of morality". -- looxix 22:32 Apr 10, 2003 (UTC)
  • Wireless Valley Communications, Inc
    • Can somebody cast an eye over this article, to me it looks like advertising or at best a business directory entry, but maybe I'm wrong... quercus robur 12:19 Apr 12, 2003 (UTC)
    • It's poor now, but I'm about to salvage. An encyclopedia can include all the dirt^H^H^H^Hbackground that the company carefully avoids mentioning on its web page. Stan 12:56 Apr 12, 2003 (UTC)
  • Embezzlement
    • Dictionary entry as is, unless someone (who isn't me ;) wants to rewrite it as an encyclopædia article. -- John Owens 22:30 Apr 12, 2003 (UTC)
Veliko Turnovo is a region and town of Bulgaria, and is as such relevant enough. I've made a standard stub ready for someone with more knowledge of the subject to complete; no need to delete the page. -- Egil 10:42 Apr 13, 2003 (UTC)
I've restored the previous content and added a little bit. The article is linked from Project Gutenberg, describes a subject that I think should be of interest to the Wikipedia readership, whether it turns out a success or not. -- Egil 09:30 Apr 13, 2003 (UTC)
  • Chinise Democracy: Michael continues to vandalize Wikipedia, even after his banning. -- goatasaur
    • Sigh. I went through the banned addresses and cleaned up the ones I'd banned. I should have left Michael banned. -- Zoe
    • I dont hate anyone, but I seriously detest Michael. Who does he think he is? One sends him a letter telling him how he could improve and he erases it. He doesnt care, and since he doesnt care he needs to be put away every time he tries a comeback.--Antonio Bubble Gum Boy Martin
  • Portal Of Evil - not only incorrect capitalization, but the article contains little more than a link to an offsite website. Unless somebody can add more to it, it should go. -- Zoe
    • I agree that it should go, but I don't know whether you can cite incorrect capitalization, since the site itself consistently uses the capital O. -- Paul A
  • SecondSuperpower - Blogism?
    • Seconded. Wikipedia is not a dictionary of memetically engineered terms. Martin
    • Deleted by me, then undeleted on Koyaanis Qatsi's request. -- Tim Starling 04:35 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
    • If it stays, and Google gives a number of hits in the interpretation given here, then at least it should have been Second Superpower. And why is it an orphan, anyway? Egil 05:27 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
    • Koyaanis has now improved the content, and so it's not really deletable anymore; although he said he agreed with my original decision to delete. I'll move the page to Second Superpower, but I'll leave the de-orphaning to someone who knows what they're talking about. Wow, deleting pages is a really good way to get people working on them! ;) -- Tim Starling 05:38 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)

Antonio Pizzazz!!! Martin

  • Aparthied -- It redirects to Apartheid, which is the correct spelling. All the pages that still used 'aparthied' have been changed to link directly to 'apartheid'. -- Kimiko 12:37 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/archive_May_2004&oldid=829322"