Misplaced Pages

:Votes for deletion/archive May 2004: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:57, 16 February 2004 editRickK (talk | contribs)36,836 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 20:07, 14 October 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,013,021 editsm Fixing Lint errors from Misplaced Pages:Linter/Signature submissions (Task 31)Tag: paws [2.2] 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{historical}}
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]


This page contains the page history of ] from 22:22, 15 May 2002 (UTC) to 06:24, 28 May 2004 (UTC).


<i><b>This is an archived copy of VfD. Please see ] for the current active version.</b></i>
<h3>This page got fubar'd in an edit conflict left unresolved by Dandrake at 19:46, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC), which deleted a number of edits. This wasn't discovered for a while, and a number of other edits accumulated. I reverted at 20:30, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC), and then I (very laboriously) went through, revision by revision, to add back in the edits that my revert, and the initial conflict, deleted.


<div style="float:right;border-style:dashed;border-color:blue;border-width:1px;text-align:center;padding:2px;">
:As far as I can tell, all are back in '''EXCEPT''' two entries that appeared in Dandrake's edit, but were not by him (his own edit comment has be incorporated). These two comments ''I think'' may have been deleted by their authors and inadvertently pulled in by Dandrake. They are:
]<br>
* ] - dictdef, nothing more. ] 07:52, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
]
and
</div>
* ] - test page or vandalism. --] 16:01, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
{{VfD_header}}
]
- ]
- ]
- ]
- ]
- ] <!--
It appears the self-reference i added is not needed after all;
i or someone can convert to the shorter form by tomorrow night, and save a few hundred bytes, if indeed no problem. -->
- '']''
- '']''
- '']''
- '']''
- '']''
- '']''
- '']''
<!-- Let's try treating the rest of this comment as a sample, rather than text to be copied and pasted! (I think it will save keystrokes and confusion. --]])
- '']'' -->


{{tl|VfD_frontmatter}}
:They '''ARE NOT''' incorporated in the text of the page below. If this was a mistake on my part, please, Fuzheado and Zandperl, add them back in. Otherwise indicate here that they should not be incorporated, and the second of you to do so remove this explanation.


== Decisions in progress ==
:Thanks. ] 21:47, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)</h3>


Note that listings more than five days old should now be moved to ].
{{msg:communitypage}}
=== May 23 ===
'''Please read and understand the ] before editing this page. Explain your reasoning for every page you list here, even if you think it is obvious. See ] for polls on current deletion issues.'''
====]====
==Helpful Links==
===Boilerplate===
Please '''do not forget''' to add a ], to any candidate page that does not already have one. (Putting ''<nowiki>{{subst:vfd}}</nowiki>'' at the top of the page adds one automatically.)


{{tl|VfD-KKSmith}}
===Subpages===
] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] --
]


====], ], ], ]====
===Related===
''']''' -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] -- ] --
] -- ]


{{tl|VfD-Hanyo}}
----


====]====
== Votes in progress ==
'''-->>>>>> ]'''
=== Ongoing discussions ===
*All recipes proposed for deletion should be discussed at ]
*'''Demon pages discussion moved to ].'''
*'''Deletion of number pages like ] -> ]'''


====]====
*'''] discussion continued at ]'''


{{tl|VfD-Glad}}


====]====


{{tl|VfD-Kyb_IE_GetEmAll}}
=== February 7 ===
* ]. Discussion continued at ].


====]====
*] Looks like a personal page ] 13:02, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Doesn't look like a personal page. ] 15:02, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**I feel really bad about this one. She's not an encyclopedia subject, but she certainly deserves to be remembered somewhere. Wikimorial and delete. ] 16:34, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**This was already listed in VfD back in May, 2003 (see ]). I supported deletion, but there were not enough votes to delete. ] 21:41, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Not encyclopaedic - are we to have a page on every kid who's ever comitted suicide? What makes Sarah different? Delete. (Also support move to Wikimemorial) ] 23:07, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Sad, but not encyclopedic. ] 01:03, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Twelve year old shooting herself with a firearm. Kinda spectacular. Enough for the news, enough for WP. See the that page's talk page for more argumentation. ] 03:23, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
**move to wikimemorial and delete.--]]
**move to wikimemorial and delete. ] 09:16, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-AberSeeSaw}}
=== February 8 ===


====]====
*] is now being discussed at ].


{{tl|VfD-BenWilson}}
=== February 9 ===


====]====


{{tl|VfD-Metarmorphosis}}


====]====
*] - this entry seems entirely to describe for a hypothetical "license" that doesn't seem to have ever been used anywhere else. The only references to it on Google are its Web page, the Misplaced Pages entry, mirrors thereof (some to an older wiki version), and a couple people's links lists. &mdash;]
** Delete, please. ] 04:32, 2004 Feb 9 (UTC)
** Delete - fictional - ] 15:25, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Um. I found quite a few non-WP-mirror hits. Keep. ] 03:58, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
*** Such as? I found exactly two, one in Brazil & one other; this isn't enough to qualify for WP. Everything else was a WP copy or bookmark list. From reading the license, CPL is just a verbose way to say "public domain". Nothing to see here, folks: delete. ] 17:18, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-WestonLullingfields}}
*] -- slang definition. ] ] 04:42, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Move to wiktionary, and maybe send Wik along with it? Or are we allowed to do that? ]] 04:45, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Agree with Pakaran on both counts. ] 04:46, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Comment about ] moved to the ]. ] 22:40, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Since when is "slang definition" a reason for deletion? Just as with the term '']'', a whole (sub-)culture is hiding behind '']''. Read ]'s book(s) before putting such words on VfD. And of course there is also a novel by ] entitled '']''. ] 12:36, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete - Wiktionary is the place for slang definitions - ] 15:25, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Agree, delete. ] 15:31, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Wow, great arguments you've got here. I'm impressed. By the way, could you refer me/us to that part of Misplaced Pages policy where it says that slang has no place in Misplaced Pages? Because if that's true, I'll nominate ]. ] 18:39, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***It's not the slang part that's a problem. It's the dictionary definition part. See ]. ]
***Oh, that's fine with me. So let's nominate ], which consists solely of dictionary definitions. ] 22:44, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
****Apparently you didn't see ]. ] 22:57, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Believe me, a cryptic reference to another page that contains lots and lots of ideas, guidelines, rules, etc. is '''not''' (let me repeat this: '''not''') an argument. You seem to have three other "arguments" at your disposal which you use in a random fashion: "dictionary definition", "slang", and "encyclopaedic" (see ] below). ] 23:06, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**** Once again. Brash fighting on the delete page. ] is an entry entirely devoted to a definition of a word (let's ignore &quot;slang&quot; here). That violates the &quot;wikipedia is not a dictionary&quot; on the page that Anthony mentions above. Baseball slang is an encyclopedic entry that talks about how slang has affected American language, and then lists examples. Now, it is perhaps not the best written prose, but it is encyclopedic, not a straight dictionary entry. Move ] to wiki- dictionary, and delete. ] 00:52, Feb 10, 2004 (UTC)
****I wasn't making an argument. The argument is already made at ] and ]. I've never used "slang" as justification for a deletion. As for my use of "encyclopedic," I think regular contributors will know what I mean. If you don't, I encourage you to stick around for a while and see. There's a lot of shorthand notation that goes around on these pages. I'm sorry if I was brash. ] 01:03, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Over time I think this could become an extremely encyclopedic article on a cultural archetype that has a lot more behind it than a simple dictionary definition. --] 01:07, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Wiktionary. KF: The Baseball Slang article isn't very good, but falls into the "lists" category (which is my vote below). ] 01:44, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep: literary term. ] 15:16, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**No comment on deleting but if it does stay it should be spelled correctly: schnorrer, which gets about compared to for the unusual one in use in this article. ] 04:24, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Important cultural term. ] 16:10, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Deleting this term could be seen as an ] by some. ] 21:17, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - an example but no content or explanation - ] 17:28, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. It's also an exact copy from the site it lists in ext. links ("DikuMud Heirarchy (c)1995-2000 Derek Snider"). --] 17:54, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete, for same reasons as above. ] 18:02, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Its fate should be the same as ]. I vote to merge them. ] 02:41, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*** I disagree: Dikumud should stay regardless, but it should be at ] instead (currently a duplicate substub). --] 03:21, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**** I fail to see your logic. If dikumud stays, then its tree definitely belongs there, regardless external links. ] 16:50, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***** I fail to agree that the post should be deleted. I think it was a harsh decision to vote it down in the first place, when an edit may have been in order. Since &quot;Dikumud&quot; is not its derivatives, putting it on the Dikumud entry doesn't make sense. The &quot;MUD Family Tree&quot; entered into the public domain in 1993, and was posted on rec.games.mud.diku and is considered the public domain, and is NOT copyrighted to Derek Snider, as the page it is from indicates, as this was an adaptation from a previously released copy, which was copied and constructed. In fact, I believe the original tree changed hands many times before being &quot;Claimed&quot; (unlawfully) by Derek Snider, if that was his intent by putting (c)1994-2000 Derek Snider on his web page. Furthermore, a &quot;MUD Family tree is not the same as the MUD itself, and would serve as a lineage / navigational tool for other entries. ]
**** Mikkalai, I disagreed with the idea that whatever happens to MUD trees should also happen to Dikumud since they aren't the same thing. Ebube_Dike, if a person makes changes to something in the PD then they hold the copyright to the changed version. I can't find the post you mention and you say its from the site the claims copyright. I've replaced the text with the copyright notice. --] 07:51, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
* Keep and Wikify. Lists and schematics in this form are not copyrightable, see ] . If anyone complains, refactor the tree into a list and then Keep. Schematics like this should be wikified and used to index topics in the wikipedia. ] 12:32, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-CollegeRoad}}
*], ] - One is self promotion and the other only exists to reference the first - ] 17:30, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. ]. ] 18:02, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*** Do not delete. Shows an important part of MU* history and the lineage of an idea's initial &quot;inception&quot; and is related to the acronym OLC. If you search google, you will notice many &quot;OLC&quot; sites. ] +
**** Do not delete. Nice online creation article, but just look in the page history to see some changes I made to it, to bring it up to Misplaced Pages's style standards. ]
** No vote, just wanted to point out the ] duplicate article. --] 04:54, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)


=== February 10 === ====]====


{{tl|VfD-NuttyNorman}}
*] - Wikitionary. ] 02:31, Feb 10, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Dictionary definition. ] 03:15, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Before something is deleted because it belongs on another project it should go through the ] system. As Newlyweds is not on the ], vote to undelete so we can see the contents are. ] 11:27, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Temporarily undeleted. Maybe it could be redirected to ]. ]] 17:42, Feb 10, 2004 (UTC)
**Redirect to Marriage, I guess. Or Wiktionary. ] 19:01, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Interwiki redirects are bad, as they are very hard to find. ] 21:27, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***redirect to ] is not interwiki. --]] 23:45, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**All the "what links here" links are referring to the ] show ''Newlyweds'', so I've turned it into a stub about that. Keep stub. --] 03:34, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Valid stub. ] 18:38, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*Pages from cs moved to ]


{{tl|VfD-DavidBarker}}
*] - company advert - <i>"...For More information visit the WilTel Communications web site at www.WilTel.com and the Government Solutions web site at www.WilTelgov.com or call 1-866.WilTel.1"</i> - ] 16:25, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** I was originally going to say keep and rework until I discovered that they aren't (which is actually a large and reasonably important company). So, delete. ] 16:35, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete ] 16:46, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Move to ]. List on cleanup. ] 23:45, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. ] 04:11, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
** Delete: advertising. ] 07:15, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - attempted dictionary definition - and I don't think it's accurate - ] 19:51, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**I can still remember the lecture in school about the difference between &quot;Practise&quot; and &quot;Practice&quot;... dictionary definition (and no it's not terribly accurate) so delete. -- ] 19:59, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Lots of philosophy in that one keep. ] 04:11, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
***Surely whether it's philosophy or not it's a dictionary definition and belongs in wiktionary? -- ] 14:10, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**I vote Keep, but work on. Its linked to from many pages and is an interesting philosophical subject or can be if worked on. I'll try something... ] 02:50, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-CheShA}}
=== February 11 ===


====]====
*] - odd effort at a how to for graphing - ] 01:25, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. ] 03:49, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*** A school math. Covered by ], ], ], ]. The the same time, ] article is missing. ] 05:02, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Alt_tv_simpsons}}
*] - dictionary definition. Redirect to ]? ] 03:55, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*], supposedly a form of music (which some find "quite annoying to listen to"). No relevent google hits . ]] 08:14, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep and list on cleanup. Relevant google hits. ] 21:21, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Delete. Anthony, maybe you could pick one that you think is in some way relevant but none of them seem to be relevant to me. ] 03:34, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
****http://www.iam.ne.jp/~nobnova-sagau/games/ez2dj4th_musiclist.html ] 04:38, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Agree, no relevant google hits (for "junkno", "junk no", "junk techno", maybe proof that ] is real), no verifiable evidence I can find of encyclopedic worth, so delete or change into a redirect to ] (which is also spelled ''junkano'', and is not an unlikely misspelling IMO). ]
** Delete: idiosyncratic. Try googling for "junkno" and "ez2dj" -- this should turn up 20000000000 - MYSTIC DREAM 9903, the one song in the world that is called "junkno" (on the ez2dj song list at least). Doesn't appear to be a misspelling. ] 07:32, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-DumbartonHarpFC}}
*] Not Misplaced Pages material ] 12:24, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, advertizing. The real article on this subject should go at ] or ]. ] 12:30, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Text is copied from . Normally I'd post on ] but I suspect that it has been posted here by the copyright owner as an ad. Suggest fast-track deletion. ] 12:31, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**6,400 hits. Keep. ] 04:16, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
***From that comment, you didn't even look at the article. The page is not about Indian beadwork but is a copy of a page that sells Native American beadwork, including prices for items currently for sale. ] a place to conduct buisness. ] 04:38, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, but there should be a ] page. Of coarse thats if someone wants to write it. :~) ] 02:50, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. As much as I'd like to get something useful out of that text, it looks hopeless. ] 05:20, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] -- idiosyncratic -- ] 17:26, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Idiosyncratic. ] 17:30, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete or redirect to ]. It's self-promotion for his web site and his writings, which form the vast majority of search engine results for the word pair, other than those which are from us. ] 20:18, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**A valid discussion of medical scientism could exist, but that's not it. Redirect to ], which could do with a paragraph discussing scientism in medicine, certainly. --] ] 21:25, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Redirect. Then put on your hard hats. ] 12:10, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep and treat it as a stub article. -- ] 16:18, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***The above IP is almost certainly ] . It belongs to the city of Richmond, where NH lives, and its only contributions have been votes for deletion that just happened to agree with MNH. ---]] 16:30, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Not well developed yet, but a great start. ] 16:24, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***From the pattern of their activity, this user may also be a Mr NH sock puppet. ] 09:26, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Lots of hits here too. ] 04:16, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
** Redirect to ]. ] 07:32, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Sean_Flowers}}


====]====
*] Genealogical stub about non-famous person, but my main objection is the title. ] 19:01, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Exactly. Delete. ] 20:24, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Title is fixed. Keep. Famous. ] 21:13, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Famous for doing what? Or being what? ] 23:19, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Nonfamous. --] 21:15, Feb 11, 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-The_Black_and_White_Space_Marine_on_the_Black_and_White_Bike}}
**Delete. Not famous. ] 21:23, 2004 Feb 11 (UTC)
**Delete as not famous. The article does not indicate why this person is in any way noteworthy. --] ] 21:25, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**How can you, ], say she's famous? Not a single page links to ], and none of the names in her own article has an entry. Who is she? Don't be so damn monosyllabic! ] 21:34, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Same way y'all can say she's not famous. It's a pure guess. I just happen to treat articles as innocent until proven guitly. ] 04:43, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
****Well, I hate to tell you, but you have the wrong attitude. First, it's not innocent vs guilty; it's famous vs not famous. You can't prove someone is not famous - it's a basic principle of logic that it's impossible to prove a negative. In other words, you can only prove someone is famous; you cannot prove they aren't. Which means you have to assume someone is nonfamous until proven otherwise. ] 04:49, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
*****As you are voting to delete or not delete an article it '''is''' guilty vs. not guilty. It's better to keep 1000 nonfamous articles then it is to delete just one famous one. That's why articles should be considered innocent until proven guilty. As for not being able to prove someone is not famous, that's a good argument for why fame should be irrelevant. Finally, I don't have to assume anything. ] 17:45, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Nonfamous. This is somebody's genealogy project. See ] 21:40, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. Not famous. ] 21:53, Feb 11, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, no proof of anything resembling noteworthyness. - ] 21:59, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, shouldn't have to be <i>famous</i>, but must at least be notable in context of <i>something</i>. ] 01:53, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Not famous, or, at least, nobody has produced any evidence that she is. Doesn't pass the Google test. ] 02:43, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Not an encylopaedic subject. The onus in on anyone saying she is famous to prove it. ] 12:42, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Fails to state any information that could colourably be interpreted as basis for inclusion in Misplaced Pages. Article could be revised so such information is included but until they my vote is to delete. --] 14:50, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete: nobody in particular. ] 07:32, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Author has not made the effort to provide even the basic info available through Google. I'm sure Hester was a very nice person. I'm equally sure her contribution to humanity was more humble than noteworthy.] 22:54, 2004 Feb 15 (UTC)


====]====
*] related to -- pointless, unathorised disclaimer, inciting hate. I shall not reverse inserted disclaimers on referenced pages, as I don't want edit wars in all referenced pages. ] 21:41, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Whatever anyone may think about the disclaimer (and I think it is in line with ordinary WP practice, and also a step in the right direction), the page itself is a valid list of topics. ] 21:45, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. The disclaimer and the page itself are a good step towards solving the constant edit wars for these pages. ]] 21:51, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***I know there are edit wars on those pages. But I object on topic based factual accuracy disclaimers. For instance ] page had reached consensus, and yet it has been listed as disputed solely on fact that it is within scope of article. Besides, correct me if I am wrong, main namespace is not intended for disclaimers. If this would be permitted, why don't insert such disclaimers in all ] based articles, since they are also often changed. I object to very idea of generic topic based disclaimers to disputed pages. ] 22:02, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
****In that case remove the disclaimer and link it from ''See also''. The article itself is useful still for the same reasons. ]] 22:07, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*****I already stated my opinion. I understand that I may be wrong and that is the reason I put here to consult community. I still think that factual accuracy should be resolved separately for each article. Even Israel/Palestine conflict pages does not have such disclaimer.] 22:19, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*****I agree with Przepla that we do not need such a disclaimer. This page is not helpful at all. Recently there was some progress towards more NPOV in some of the articles, and I don't know why we should need this disclaimer now. Delete. -- ] 08:46, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - Removed text in article requesting text be added to other polish articles and reference to talk page (not appropriate for the article itself) - This appears to be trying to be some kind of meta-page - I assume we are not going to try to create meta pages for each controvertial issue but are going to use existing talk pages. - ] 15:47, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete 1st the authors of this page are complete ignorants. They put the disclaimer on the areas, which never been a part of moden Germany. The main issue with thie page, is that the cities are currently Polish and are not subject of any international dispute. Why people of those cities should be denied right to express their view on the history of their cities? ] 17:29, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Can I make the point that it would be good for Misplaced Pages to resolve all the differences about articles in this area before May 1, when Poland accedes to the EU? And that this will require discussion with all Wikipedians interested in these matters? Simply calling for deletions doesn't help this process.] 17:38, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Good index page keep.] 04:16, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)


{{WP:Votes for deletion/Ambiversion}}
**Delete or rename the page. Let say Polish_German view points. Do not include any disclaimers. ] 10:11, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - duplicated in ] and ]. 23:16, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. ] 23:22, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Hmm. I'd suggest merging the two separate articles into ] and making ] and ] into redirects. Failing that -- keep ]. ] 07:32, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Nalgene}}
=== February 12 ===
*]. Can anyone find any record of this thing existing other than on gaming sites? ] 03:24, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep (Updated article). Non-gaming site references (2 of many) appended to article (cos I can't get them to work in here) ] 04:05, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. ] 04:27, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)


====]====
* ] - mostly some POV rambles, not much worthwhile info there. ] | ] 03:59, Feb 12, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete.] 13:20, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. An article being bad isn't a reason to delete. There should clearly be an article at this name. Improve, don't delete. ] 01:13, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**There is culture in turkey. Keep. ] 04:27, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
** Keep. Move to clean up list. ] 18:30, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**delete if not improved by Feb 19. --]]
** Merge back into Turkey -- not enough yet for a sep. article. ] 09:34, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Elena_Filatova}}
*]. Can anybody find any proof of the existence of these people other than a site that gets its information from Misplaced Pages? ] 04:46, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**I can confirm the existence of some Jews of Medina who converted to Islam in 622, but not under this name or any variant Romanizations thereof -- and I find no evidence whatsoever that they formed a distinct sect of Islam. I don't know; it seems like an odd thing to make up, so defer for now. --] ] 05:06, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] Wictionary. ] 12:51, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - move to wiktionary - ] 15:37, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Could be expanded. Keep stub. --]]


{{tl|VfD-Call_of_Duty_United_Offensive}}
*] Not an encylopaedic subject. Wikibooks? ] 12:53, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Encyclopedic subject. ] 14:26, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - move to appropriate location unless it is updated to be more than the mere recipe it is now. - ] 15:37, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**] this and all how-tos to wikibooks. ] 14:26, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Move to wikibooks. ] 18:30, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**move to wikibooks and delete. --]]
**Delete -keep, put under ].or make sure to link to from biodiesel. This is an extemely relevant item for present day and historical existence. ] 02:50, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] (no giggling at the back, please) Dictionary def of a Latin word. ] 13:05, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - ] 15:37, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep: a word with a lot of peculiar uses. Not many Latin words deserve WP articles; this is one of them. ] 18:30, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Political_terrorism}}
*]- non-english (german), probably a copyvio, and not an encyclopedic article either, but an interview. ] 13:43, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Isn't this a candidate for instant deletion? ] 14:40, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Moved to ] for deletion after seven days - ] 15:41, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
* ], ] - patent nonsense, claiming that ] was the son of ]. Unless this needs context as fiction based on a work I am not familiar with, delete it. -- ] 14:43, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Ridiculous cryptohistory (I think it's serious --- is probably the source). Delete with extreme prejudice. ---]] 14:54, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete nonsense.] 15:00, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - ] 15:37, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Alphabetical_List_of_Hoboken_streets}}
*] - attempt to recreate ] (listed above) under another name - ] 17:00, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**] to the above] This is silly. Do we need an article on ] saying how people sometimes use the telephone for phone sex and drug dealing, and oh isn't that terrible, fortunately we're not like that? Or what about an article on ], describing how people send pornography through the mail, and also letter bombs, how dreadful, tsk tsk? Delete this article and any further clones or reincarnations thereof. ---]] 17:08, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***I know it looks silly. Please read the article on ]. Moral panics are just about this type of silliness.] 17:21, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
****My point was not that the concern over pornography on the Internet and suchlike is silly (though most of it is :-), but that having an article that basically says &quot;Some people worry about this stuff, and maybe their worries are justified, but maybe not&quot; doesn't inform or educate the reader about abuses of the Internet. The place to document concern over ] and ] is in those articles, not in a vague editorial. ---]] 17:32, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Merge salvagable content into ] and <s>redirect</s> delete as history has been moved to ]. ] 17:17, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. This article is a POV rant. I don't see it as fixable other than moving it into a "misuse of technology" article if one exists. ] 17:55, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Don't give Anthony ideas - that would be just as POV not matter how it is written because the title and context is POV to begin with. - ] 17:59, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
****Agree that the title is POV. That's why I recommended moving to Internet and redirecting. ] 19:09, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*****I think all these (even as redirects) need deletion. They are not appropriate since they, even as redirects, are POV titles. Got confused about your intent to move to Internet when you started updating the POV articles. - ] 19:17, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
******I would agree with you, but deleting the redirect would destroy the page history. I've moved the page history to ]. That seems like an NPOV title. ] 19:21, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***What is POV about the current article? ] 19:09, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
****The title is POV. Misuse of the internet imples that the internet has "right" and "wrong" uses. If moved to "Concerns about Internet usage" or something, I'd support keeping it. The only other problem I could find with the reworked article is the use of the hand wavy term "abounds", which is somewhat POV. ] 03:06, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**** How can the word ''misuse'' NOT be pov? It implies that there is a particular way that we should be using the net. Delete. ] 18:03, 2004 Feb 13 (UTC)
*****Did you even look at it? It's been renamed to ]. ] 07:36, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete: inherent POV. ] 18:30, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Move this poll to redirects for deletion, as the page is merely a redirect. ] 07:36, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)


===May 24===
*] -- completely made-up. --]] 18:40, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
====]====
**Delete unless verified. ] 19:10, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Can't find the word outside unless it's misspelled. Reading the entry--clearly bogus.] 20:15, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Patent nonsense, delete immediately. I live in So. Indiana and we have no Wha Bowl or Orange Tutu Thing. -- ] 21:10, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, no doubt. --] 01:09, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Does not exist - pure fabrication. --] 02:39, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. More SmartBee fiction. ] 03:30, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Complete Nonsense, Even if it is amusing. ] 03:10, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Social_surplus}}
*] - made up? wikibooks? ] 19:48, Feb 12, 2004 (UTC)
**<s>Keep.</s> Looks accurate from a quick glance. ] 19:58, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**It was decided sometime back that how-to's and tutorials belong in Wikibooks, not here. Delete. ] 19:59, Feb 12, 2004 (UTC)
***Can you point us to this decision? ] 20:01, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
****One is here: ]. There are others, for example ] ]
*****Neither of them look like consensus to me, but as long as it's transwikied somewhere, I'm not going to try to block this. ] 05:22, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Move to wikibooks, as per precedent. ] 04:21, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**] to wikibooks and delete ] 12:56, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*]
**Continued at ]
** In case you didn't notice, the page links to a whole bunch of lists of proverbs: <br>]--]--]--]--]--]--]--] <br>Their fate must be decided in a similar way. I am tempted to add ]--]--]. ] 21:37, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***"It is a good day to die." (''"Heghlu'meH QaQ jajvam"'' tlhIngan Hol. ] 22:25, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)) "I am as constant as the northern star." "Revenge is dish best served cold." ] 21:43, Feb 12, 2004 (UTC)
****And for pronunciations, go here: http://www.kli.org/tlh/phrases.html (God this is so shameful) ] 07:00, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Expression_engine}}
*] just some guy with some studies (I presume), talking of what an ''outarage'' or whatever, was the ''killing'' of this baby. --'']''
**delete, the article is taking shape but this talk page is just a rant about doctors killing twins ] | ] 09:29, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep - The <u>talk</u> page you suggest deleting discusses possible selfish motives on the part of the doctors but I do not find it worthy of deletion under any existing guidelines. I had questions myself when I heard that the fully formed head (if not the body) of a siamese twin was going to be severed, and thus killed for a reason other than to save the life of the other twin. Rather than delete the text, it should be discussed. Give that person a reason why you don't agree with their evaluation of the surgery. - ] 15:00, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Obviously we should keep the article page, and how can we delete the talk page for a valid article page? --] 18:36, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Talk pages are essential to what goes on here. ] 08:01, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
=== February 13 ===
* ] &mdash; Substub, dictionary definition (and not a particularly good one). There could be a good article about formula fiction, but this one has shown no signs of becoming one; it has not changed since Jan. 2003. ] 00:23, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep stub. ] 00:35, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Redirect and merge with ], which already covers similar territory more thoroughly. ] 02:00, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Why wouldn't it be good in the future? ] 04:25, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
***I have tried to expand this, and distinguish it from ]. -- ] 15:32, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***"Formula fiction" and "genre fiction" are still not quite right. Might be heading in right direction. ] 20:57, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***It's improving. Keep. ] 23:27, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Won't this always be an essay? How could this become an encyclopedia reoprt? All genres have formulas. A good Misplaced Pages entry would identify formulas in genres, under each genre. ] 23:44, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep. Recent edits are going in the right direction. "Beatniks Wandering the Midwest" -- hey, wait a minute! I resemble that comment! ] 17:13, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-The_egg_and_the_chicken_problem}}
*]. Misplaced Pages is not a website for political campaigns. ] 03:59, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Also note the copy at ]
**Very useful content. Merge into ] article. ] 04:05, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
**Describing a political campaign is '''very''' encyclopedic. Keep. ] 04:25, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
***It's not a description of a political campaign. It's a collection of quotes. Read it.--]]
**Keep. If you're not allowed to list a politician's policies, then you can't really write a very good article about them for an encyclopedia! ] 04:42, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Please read the article before voting. We did not "write" that article. Al Gore did. His views may be (and indeed are) mentioned as part of his biography at ]. A collection of quotations is inappropriate.--]]
**Delete, it is not even a platform. He never ran on issues like gay marriage or the Iraq war. Also wikipedia is not a collection of quotes, which this article is. - ] 07:26, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
**delete, see ].--]]
**Delete both. Ask yourself, "What is it we're trying to make here?" ] 09:38, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***What is wrong with having a page that shows Gore's platform? I would rather have quotes that describe his stands than someone else try to characterize them for him. Plus, if you look at the ] page, where they show his views, they are also quotes. So what is the big deal? Everytime I take time to do something about Al Gore, the same people throw a fit everytime. But what I do is not something out of the ordinary, it comes from other Wiki pages, but they have no problem with them. I think you are on the wrong side of the issue here and the people's voice has spoken. This page provides a first hand look at how Al Gore stands on the major issues, and again, it is him speaking for himself, which is better because of clarity. So please leave it. ]
****The difference of course being that Dean's opinions are not given a page to themselves but are placed in a context (his life) as befits an encyclopaedia. ] 12:51, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*****The Dean page has quotes under views, just as this page does. Now if you want to merge it with the main article, go ahead, but I don't see what the problem is. ]
**] to ]. ] 12:59, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep: useful material on an important person. A collection of quotes is a pretty crappy article, but the article needs to be there and it's better than nothing. Encourage someone to put some analysis into it. ] 07:48, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Don't worry about it now, I have done '''more''' work on the Gore page and added a views section that does not have quotes, but statements on how he stands. But there is already one person bringing up a rip about that. I just don't see why you all are so intent on bugging me on everything I do with this page. It is redundant and I would like it to stop because I am only trying to help. ]]


====]====
* ] Mere speculation, not a shred of evidence bar a biblical quote or two, which could just as well go into ] or some such. Probably beyond help. ] 09:17, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. ] 09:25, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Mostly empty headings, and some of what is there is tedious and tendentious. ] 09:35, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Page history indicates that this article was created to make a point. ] 11:20, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete: headings are almost an exact copy of headings in ], it does appear this article only serves as a POV exercise. -- ] 14:03, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete heavily POV article. The least that could be said about this is it should be ] but even in that case it would need substantial revision. --] 18:34, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**'''Del'''. It's a ] (though not nearly as ridiculous as ]. <s>Delete.</s> --]] 22:28, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)-- reformatted by ] 23:14, 2004 Feb 13 (UTC)** Keep stalking horse, a real term. ] 22:53, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
***Sorry, what I meant was "] is a ]". I see that I wasn't entirely clear. --]] 23:05, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC
**Del. unless it is changed to a more serious article on the history of the concept of "heterosexuality" ] 09:50, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)
**Ah! Ah! Ah! They met, they got married, they had little children and they lived happily ever after. Boring! Delete. ] 13:27, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** It complements ]. Keep. ] 14:00, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)
***I disagree. ] is a growing account of the culture, beliefs and opinions of or directed towards an oppressed minority over the last few thousand years. This is already complemented by history in general, which is traditionally ] in its viewpoint. For a similar account of heterosexual people in the same time period, open any history textbook, it's there. -- ] 14:13, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep. Whole books are written on the ''history of sexuality'', this would help some ppl see thier sexual past (and how it relates to other orientations). This topic is ''as valid'' as homosexuality history. Giving an account of the culture, beliefs and opinions as ''specifically'' relating around heterosexuality (not the standard history textbook line, which does not focus on sexuality) is needed (especially about "opinions of" or "directed towards" other orientations (not just homosexuals, but bi and transgender individuals) ... this article would be informative in such a light; ''ie''. how wrongs have been commited, how things have changed, and what is occuring today concerning heterosexuality). The History of homosexuality is as "heavily POV article" and "makes a point", so this isn't anything different. As to being an exact copy of headings ... don't reinvent the wheel (and as it grows it can change headings). To solve the problem of empty headings, place a stub msg. History of homosexuality is a "'']''" as much as this heterosexuality history article. The History of homosexuality can also compare contrast to the history of heterosexuality. As for interesting articles, "They met, they spent time together, then they died" is not interesting, IMO ... in contrast to "They met, they got married, they had little children and then they died". If this is deleted, the homosexual one should be too. All for now <nowiki></end rant></nowiki> ... ] 21:50, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Contains just a little meaningful material; should be transformed into a balanced ]. - ] 14:42, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep. List on pages needing attention. ] 17:13, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Vince_Buffalo}}
*] - irredeemable POV. ] 09:22, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
**Put anything of value in ] before deleting. ] 11:02, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**The current version of the page does not strike me as overly POV, but the content seems to belong more properly directly in ] (which is not yet so large an article that the two can't be combined). This page title is wrong for the topic, though. Merge then delete. ] 14:07, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - POV - ] 14:51, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. ] 23:59, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Merge back into state terrorism and redirect. The list is cited and attributed, which makes it NPOV. ] 06:39, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** <strike>Merge into ] and delete. Politics is (are?) important, the connection with Michael Moore is not. ] 07:48, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)</strike> (new vote below)
***"merge into ] and delete is not a valid option (except for public domain text) because it destroys the information on authorship of the content." ]
**Just for context: I created this article after pulling it out of ] because Moore's random (fictitious) list had no place there, both because it does not on the whole pertain to terrorism at all, and his long list of opinions is not suitable encyclopedic material for a subject as broad as state terrorism, belonging instead under some "Michael Moore" head. Thus, this article was a compromise to keep it at all. I agree it is worthless and should be destroyed, but anyone else who favors this should also propose how to keep the peace after doing so. -- ]] 10:07, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete '''See my case at ].''' ] 12:36, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Merge into ] and redirect. 172 has made a very convincing case. --]] 12:49, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Merge into a Michael Moore page and redirect. I agree with ]. ] 17:13, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] Another recipe. ] 17:58, 2004 Feb 13 (UTC)
**Delete - recipe - ] 18:14, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Transwiki to recipes. ] 22:50, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-ThePress}}
*] while this looks sensible, even professional, it gets exactly zero google hits, which it not what you expect from a new network protocol that has any reasonable chance of being used. ] 18:09, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - added VfD message on page - delete unless someone can provide a single link or reference to provie its existence. - ] 18:14, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. You know, I'd say this article is a worthy candidate for ]. ] 19:16, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Either "original research" or a prank. ] 20:34, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
**Delete. Looked unlikely when I first mentioned it on cleanup. ] 20:40, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. There's no RFC for it or any other standards track, looks like original research. ]]


{{WP:Votes for deletion/Guff}}
*] - fictional. The third largest channel island is either Sark or Alderney. There is no St Gregory's. ] 19:38, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Unless perhaps we're in an alternate universe? Sounds believable, dunnit! ] 20:49, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**He does mention it is volcanic, so maybe it just rose up out of the depts&#8230; Get rid of it. ]] 21:25, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Fictional. Googling "Svenby" turns up no tourist information. ] 23:10, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. I think I recognise the writing style of a previous troll. ] 23:15, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - someone's teacher? not famous. ] 20:47, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. At least not fictional, see ]. But doesn't pass the Google test. ] 23:10, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. I am more famous than this former Tower records employee. ] 09:40, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)


{{WP:Votes for deletion/Chung_Ling_Record}}
=== February 14 ===
*] - ] used to link to this, but I changed that link to ]; thus ] is obsolete and a weak stub. ], as observed by ] 00:44, 2004 Feb 14 (UTC)]
**I merged the info, made the page a redirect to ]. OK? ] 02:11, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - looks like nonsense to me ] 03:37, 2004 Feb 14 (UTC)
**Delete. Nonsense. ] 04:20, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - looks like a gaming group of friends trying to make themselves a page. - ] 16:50, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Ditto. ] 22:21, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. Nothing links here, some private club's page. ] 22:50, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete: vanity. ] 05:01, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Chinese_cannibalism}}
*]--nonfamous children's book, can't grow past what's here. ] 06:55, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Add infomation either to Seaseme Street or create a new article about books based on Seaseme Street then redirect. ] 13:53, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. No content on page (just title & year of publication). ] 22:50, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete: content free. ] 05:01, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep. Check it out now, I've expanded it a fair bit. -- ]


====]====


{{tl|VfD-Iraq_Liberation_Act}}
*] and ] and ] Fairly useless orphans. ] 09:05, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Hmm. I was in a "Probability and statistics" class at three different universities so in my mind the phrase always goes together. (As it says on the page.) Although at the moment nothing links to them, it seems probable that something will, and then the pages would reappear. But I'm not violently opposed to deletion. ] 22:10, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep. If deleted it would be recreated. ] 05:01, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] Looks like self-promotion ] 14:27, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - vanity/promotion/lame request for attention OR identity theft attack as a joke or malicious attempt to spam someone. - ] 16:50, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. WTF is an "identity theft attack?" ] 17:25, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Pretend to be someone you don't like... go on the web as them and post their real life phone number, email address, ICQ/Instant Messenger address, postal address, etc... then either request people to contact the person you pretend to be or make inflamatory posts to create a flood of resonses to the person you are pretending to be. It is a common way to attack spammers. - ] 17:45, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
****What crazy terms you kids have these days. ] 04:47, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-SchneersonQuotes}}
*] Looks like an advertisement rather than an encyclopedia article. The group in question is hardly important enough to warrant an encyclopedia article anyway. ] 16:18, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Verifiable. ] 17:27, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***It may be verifiable but that doesn't mean it warrants an encyclopedia article. Are we to have an article about every obscure gospel choir ] 18:32, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Checking their web site, looks like one of a zillion small casual choirs. ] 22:57, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Del. --] 05:29, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - dictionary definition. should be moved to wiktionary - ] 15:20, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, move to wiktionary - ] 17:50, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep/rewrite to stub; looks like could be an interesting topic. ] 22:20, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep/rewrite - An important and influential schism. ] 22:25, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*** Changed from a dictionary entry, to a brief stub. ] 23:04, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep: informative. ] 05:01, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC
**Have another look. It's getting better. ] 06:49, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC))


{{WP:Votes for deletion/Yayhooray}}
*] - 15-year old's vanity page - ] 17:50, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Predict Anthony's vote: "Verifiable and Famous. Keep" ] 18:09, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)
**Why not just move it to a user page? I've done that before (whether they wanted me to or not :)) ] 18:14, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***They would need to get a user name first. ]] 22:29, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)~
****Well, then they would get ] :) ] 16:07, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Move to user page and delete. ] 18:37, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Newbie mistake. ]] 22:29, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. ] 22:39, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete: vanity. ] 05:01, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - promotion of website - ] 18:20, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Interesting website, might buy a sword or two from them. But delete the article, it has no place here. -- ] 19:35, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Promotion of website. ] 22:23, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete: advert. ] 05:01, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-UppercaseDay}}
*] - A misspelling that's a redirect to the correct spelling; nothing links to it. ] 22:01, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. ] 22:39, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep. Why delete? It's not getting in the way, and it may be useful if someone misspells. Nothing ''should'' link to this kind of redirect. -] 03:44, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] a little nonsensical, not very informative ] 23:42, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Needs work, but keep. ] 00:21, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Needs a picture... any idea where to find a copyright-free picture of a tank top?
***
**Keep. Needs work, but is informative. ] 02:32, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Articles on types of garments are valid. ] 05:15, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep - its much better now: originally I was talking about ] 05:32, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Wikipedia_Who}}
=== February 15 ===
*]. Advertisement, substub. ] 00:33, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - advert - ] 23:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*]. Not famous/important. --] 00:37, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - vanity - ] 23:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Canadian_gun_registry}}
* ]. This page is essentially a polemic against the doctrine rather than an imformative definition of it. Regardless of my opinion of the doctrine, i would expect as a researcher, to find a posiotive definition of the doctrine with links to arguments against it. ]
**Should probably be listed on ], not here. ] 04:56, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** The article was created with a practical purpose in mind, which has since been satisfied. Its essay form probably qualifies it for deletion. However, it was written more than a year ago, and has been linked from several other articles. Rewriting may be a less messy route. ] 07:55, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep, this should not be here. ] 15:02, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep, but truncate to a near-stub. The article topic is highly appropriate. The two opening quotations from Calvin and the Westminster Confession of Faith are a good start for such an article. But even the sentences introducing quotations need to be rewritten to remove the POV stuff about "bluntness." The rest is very non-neutral, and is "original research." I am strongly tempted to rewrite the opening "The doctrine of ], as formulated by Calvin, is: 'Predestination ' It appears in the ] in this form: "By the decree ." and move ALL the rest of it to the Talk page. The above would then constitute the entire article (until the time that someone more knowledgable about Calvinism than I should choose to add to it). ] 00:42, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Keep. Sounds good, do it. ] 02:14, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


=== May 25 ===
*] - one of a series which raises the questions: 1) Do we need a list of any porn stars, living or dead? 2) Do we need lists of anybody's causes of death? ] 05:34, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
====]====
**And beyond that, is this going to give rise to inevitable lists of "porn stars who died in car crashes," "porn stars who died from falling into open manholes," "porn stars who died in curling iron tragedies"....? Delete! ] 05:39, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
*** "porn stars who died from falling into open manholes"? Those would be the gay porn-stars? ] 10:02, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**YES WE NEED! DELETING THIS WILL DESTROY MY SERIES OF DEAD PORNSTARS : ] - DELETING MY HARD WORK IS HARASSMENT OF NEW USERZ! KEEP! ] 05:38, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**I have no problem with keeping a ]. We probably don't need all of these multiple lists, though. ] 05:36, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete the various entries with lists of various ways in which the porn stars died (accidentally, from drugs, etc), but keep a general list of porn stars. ] 05:40, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. - ] 06:22, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. We wouldn't have this kind of list for other "types" of people, (Goths, vegetarians, truck drivers, and so on, ad nauseum...) so why for porn stars? ] 07:44, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Del. ] 10:02, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**We don't need all these lists, and it's not harassment. Nobody, new user or long-time Wikipedian, has the automatic right to have their writing included if it's not encyclopedic. If you're concerned about losing your work, save it to your hard drive. (That's a good idea anyway; backups are good, and no server is 100 percent reliable.) ] 14:44, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, this one is just too silly ] 14:54, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep or move to wikipedia: namespace. Useful for creating an encyclopedia. ] 15:39, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - ] 23:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, in my humble-or-otherwise opinion and from my personal POV, this is just not encyclopedic. A list of porn stars with brief bios would be OK. ] 00:16, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Irrelevant. Delete with extreme prejudice. ] 10:54, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Del, plaese. ] 13:40, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Jason_Richey}}
*] - It's creepy, and it's unnecessary. A list of porn stars with a note beside each name giving cause of death (if no longer with us) would surely suffice. Delete. ] 05:42, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**NO! THIS IS EXTREME UNJUSTIFIED HARASEMENT! KEEP! ] 05:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Exploding is exactly right. One all-encompasing list of porn stars with a column for cause of death (if they are departed) should more than suffice. Merge all the relavant lists there. ] 05:46, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. - ] 06:22, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. We wouldn't have this kind of list for other "types" of people, (Goths, vegetarians, truck drivers, and so on, ad nauseum...) so why for porn stars? ] 07:44, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep. WINP. ] 10:02, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep, ]] 15:19, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep or move to wikipedia: namespace. Useful for creating an encyclopedia. ] 15:39, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, merge with ]. -- ] 17:52, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - if it stands I'll create lists of dead actors, dead CEOs, dead disciples, dead founding fathers, dead vikings, and any other category that certainly doesn't need to exist - ] 23:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
**Delete, in my humble-or-otherwise opinion and from my personal POV, this is just not encyclopedic. A list of porn stars with brief bios would be OK. ] 00:16, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Irrelevant. Delete with extreme prejudice. ] 10:54, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Del, plaese. ] 13:40, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-debate_CCITT_X_409_84}}
*] - One of the new "porn star" entries. I have no problem with information about porn stars, but this is a particularly useless entry. WHEN were they thought to be dead? Who thought they were dead? Are any of them dead now? None of these questions are answered. Presumably a porn star who three people thought was dead in 1977 but who was fine but then later did die in 1986 could be on this list. Delete. ], 05:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**THESE QUESTIONS ANSWERED AT THE EXTERNAL LINK! U VFDED THE ARTICXLE JUST SOME MINUTES AFTER I CREATED IT! THIS IS HARASSMENT! I STILL HAVE WORK TO DO AND I WILL WRITE ARTICLES FOR EVERY PORN STAR LISTED! ] 05:52, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***There's certainly no problem with that, so long as you use proper case and the articles are NPOV. ] 05:56, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**It's certainly better than ], which we also have. ] 05:50, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*it's not harassment and there's no need to yell (hint: turn off your capslock button). Even if -- especially if -- you write articles for each and every porn star listed, there still doesn't need to be more than one ]. Delete. ] 06:01, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**THERE IS NO POLICY ON ALL CAPS CASE - PROPER CASE FOR ME IS ALL CAPS - IT LOOOKS BETTER! ] 06:02, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Well you might think so, but I'm letting you know that a lot of people take offense to all caps posts because they're perceived as yelling. Anyway, what's next? ]? ]? ]? This is bordering on the ridiculous. ]
**Delete. - ] 06:22, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. We wouldn't have this kind of list for other "types" of people, (Goths, vegetarians, truck drivers, and so on, ad nauseum...) so why for porn stars? ] 07:44, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Del. ] 10:02, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, again, too silly. ] 14:54, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep or move to wikipedia: namespace. Useful for creating an encyclopedia. ] 15:39, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete and merge names with ] - ] 17:52, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - ] 23:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, in my humble-or-otherwise opinion and from my personal POV, this is just not encyclopedic. A list of porn stars with brief bios would be OK. ] 00:16, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Irrelevant. Delete with extreme prejudice. ] 10:54, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Del, plaese. ] 13:40, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


==== ] and ] ====
*] - Delete for many reasons above. ], 05:53, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**THIS IS NOT MINE - IT'S ]'S ] 05:58, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. - ] 06:22, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Can we just amalgate this as "List of porn stars who~" series? I vote that all such lists, except for one main "list of porn stars" should be deleted. ] 05:55, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**I've just discovered that there is already a ]. We don't need any other lists at all. My vote is to delete all pages in ] category. ] 06:15, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. We wouldn't have this kind of list for other "types" of people, (Goths, vegetarians, truck drivers, and so on, ad nauseum...) so why for porn stars? ] 07:44, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Del. ] 10:02, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, again w the silliness ] 14:54, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep or move to wikipedia: namespace. Useful for creating an encyclopedia. ] 15:39, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, merge with ] (which should contain birth/death dates when known. Details on each person's non-death can be included in bio articles. - ] 17:52, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - ] 23:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, in my humble-or-otherwise opinion and from my personal POV, this is just not encyclopedic. A list of porn stars with brief bios would be OK. ] 00:16, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Bandwagon_Oklahoma_Music}}
**Irrelevant. Delete with extreme prejudice. ] 10:54, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Del, plaese. ] 13:40, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*]. Oy. And in too much detail. ] 06:19, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**KEEP. AN ENCYCLOPIDIA NEEDS DETAIL ] 06:20, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. - ] 06:22, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. ] 07:44, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep. ]
** Delete. ] 14:02, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**Keep, this is clearly more valid/accurate ] 14:54, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep or move to wikipedia: namespace. Useful for creating an encyclopedia. ] 15:39, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep, or incorporate as on offshopt of other articles on erotic art/pornography. -- ] 17:52, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - who is going to verify this information? - ] 23:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, in my humble-or-otherwise opinion and from my personal POV, this is just not encyclopedic. A list of porn stars with brief bios would be OK. ] 00:16, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Irrelevant. Delete with extreme prejudice. ] 10:54, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Del, plaese. ] 13:40, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Tom_Jackson}}
*]. See all posts above. Once again, there is already a ]. ] 06:21, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - ] 06:22, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. We wouldn't have this kind of list for other "types" of people, (Goths, vegetarians, truck drivers, and so on, ad nauseum...) so why for porn stars? ] 07:44, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. This is the only one of the porn star lists that makes some sense, since the list criteria AIDS (maybe it should be renamed into HIV though) is closely related to the pornstar profession. A list of goths by cock size? No! A list of goths that died from makeup gun accidents? Yes! ] 09:54, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Why for porn stars? Because they ] for thier ]. ]
**Keep, or incorporate somehow into ]; but verify the information. This is data I can easily imagine someone looking for... - ] 14:34, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** At very least the title of this list is inaccurate: people do not die "from" AIDS, they die of opportunistic infections and diseases that occur as a result of having a weakened immune system. A more appropriate title would be "Erotic actors who have died of AIDS-related causes."
*** With respect to 'died of aids' vs 'died of opportunistic infections caused by aids' - while you are correct, I think you are splitting hairs needlessly. ] 14:41, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**keep, this might actually be of some research value, etc... ] 14:54, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Re: "died from AIDS," it's not strictly accurate and it's not very good English either, which is why I suggested "Erotic actors who have died of AIDS-related causes" (if indeed we are to have such a list at all). ] 14:57, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
***Maybe, but thats not something anyone is likely to type into a search engine. Porn stars who have died from AIDS comes much more readilly to the tongue (or fingertips) ] 15:03, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**...which is what redirect pages are for, isn't it? After all, if one really needs to know which porn star (is that synonymous with erotic actor to begin with?) died of AIDS, then surely one would need one's information to be as specific as possible? Was it cancer? Pneumonia? ...? ] 15:11, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**Note that the account which created this page is a (now banned) reincarnation of a number of banned vandal accounts. This article should be summarily deleted, something I would already have done had this not been listed here. -- ] | ] 15:11, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Where can I go to argue against the policy of summarilly deleting/reverting articles written/edited by banned users? ] 15:19, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep or move to wikipedia: namespace. Useful for creating an encyclopedia. ] 15:39, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - merge into and AIDS page. - ] 23:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, in my humble-or-otherwise opinion and from my personal POV, this is just not encyclopedic. A list of porn stars with brief bios would be OK. ] 00:16, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**<s>Irrelevant. Delete with extreme prejudice.</s> Changed my mind. This could be encyclopedic. Keep, pending further review. ] 10:54, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] ] 06:22, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius! Wipe out all these ridiculous porn star lists. --]] 06:32, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. List of accidentally killed popstars wouldn't be removed either. ] 06:58, 2004 Feb 15 (UTC)
***Delete. Changed my mind, after seeing the number of lists ] 06:59, 2004 Feb 15 (UTC)
**Delete the whole series (merge back into one list). Agree too many overly detailed list topics. ] 07:34, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. We wouldn't have this kind of list for other "types" of people, (Goths, vegetarians, truck drivers, and so on, ad nauseum...) so why for porn stars? ] 07:44, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***For a simple reason: people are interested in actors, politicians, and celebrities. It's often asked, is so-n-so still alive? And where do you go to answer that question? A reference work, hopefully. Most of these actors meet or surpass the 5K distribution threshold.-- ~ender, 2004-02-15 03:49:MST
**Delete the whole series. These are absurd, but any useful content could be merged with the aforementioned erotic actos list. ] 08:00, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Delete series after merging - but distinguish between porn star and erotic actors.-- ~ender, 2004-02-15 03:49:MST
** Keep. ]
**Delete, I don't see a need for this one (I admit this is getting pretty arbitrary, why is AIDS ok and accidental death not? Please come to the ] to discuss guidelines) ] 14:54, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**I can at least see more encyclopaedic value for the former given that erotic actors do have sex for a living, and their numbers were rather hard hit in the early years. ] 14:59, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**Note that the account which created this page is a (now banned) reincarnation of a number of banned vandal accounts. This article should be summarily deleted, something I would already have done had this not been listed here. -- ] | ] 15:12, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep or move to wikipedia: namespace. Useful for creating an encyclopedia. ] 15:39, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, merge with ]. Details can go on bio pages. - ] 17:52, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete before we have list of B actors who died accidentally, list of CEOs who died accidentally, list of founding fathers who died accidentally, heck, how about list of CEOs who died of natural causes? - ] 23:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, in my humble-or-otherwise opinion and from my personal POV, this is just not encyclopedic. A list of porn stars with brief bios would be OK. ] 00:16, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Irrelevant. Delete with extreme prejudice. ] 10:54, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Windermere_Real_Estate}}
*] -- prank article by some students probably. See its talk page for more. ] 11:10, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** delete, Complete nonsense. None of the 'philosophers' can be found with google nor in the 'Encyclopedia of Eastern Philosophy'.] 17:31, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete, agree with Andries -- ] 18:17, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - a not very famous web-comic. - ] 15:37, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, not important enough. -- ] 18:17, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Not verifiable. No original research. ] 20:11, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Robert_Kyle_Wilson}}
*] - hopelessly POV. Each sentence portrays Marani and Europanto as an attack on Esperanto and Esperantists. I really can't see anything in there to salvage except "Diego Marani...is the inventor of...Europanto". At least part of the article looks like it was created by one of the parties involved in the edit war at ]. --] 17:26, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - ] 23:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - Vanity page. --] 17:43, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, certainly not famous -- ] 18:17, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Famous enough to have 8 odd pages linking to him , assuming it's the same person. ] ] 18:25, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***I don't think it is the same person. --] 19:18, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Billy Dee Williams played Lando in Star Wars. The birth dates are the same. ] 19:36, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)
**I rewrote this into a page on the Star Wars actor; I think the previous version was about someone entirely different. Should be fine now, keep. ] 20:11, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Because of Meelar's edit, I withdraw my request to delete. '''Keep.''' --] 00:00, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep, definitely. If for no other reason, the famous Colt 45 Malt Liquor commercials. ] 07:59, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep the bio of this star of '']'', '']'', '']'', and '']''. ] 18:53, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Massage_Therapy_School_-_NMSNT}}
*] - little more than an advert. Is this actually well known in Australia? -- ] 18:19, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. More than an advert. ] 20:09, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**No vote. I removed what I thought made it, "like an advert," so now it's less like an advert but more like a stub. (I considered removing the silly sentence explaining that it sells coffee). I see no compelling reason to keep it but no harm in keeping it. ] 01:01, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC) Odd, the corporate website is strangely silent on matters such as annual revenue, number of stores, etc. It was founded by someone from Seattle, by the way. The article was created by an anon who has contributed two substantial articles on ] and ]. ] 01:11, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** I don't know if Zarraffa's is famous, but I know of it. I think many people living in Brisbane would be aware of it. So I think it's fine to keep. ] 02:03, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - are we going to have a (incomplete, and never likely to be complete) product catalogue for every manufacturer? -- ] 18:20, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Why not? We are building an incomplete, and never likely to be complete encyclopaedia. ] ] 18:22, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Move to another namespace or keep. Useful for creating an encyclopedia. ] 18:32, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** I created this article for the purpose of being able to write an article about the printer listed there, without having to make it an orphan. I suppose I could have looked for/created a list of computer printer models. But if the list is deleted, the article would become an orphan. &mdash;] 19:47, 2004 Feb 15 (UTC)
***And that article deserves to be deleted as well.
** There's a ] too. If IBM's ok, then Sony's ok. Agree with Mintguy that incompleteness is not a criteria for deletion. ] 08:40, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Comment - Could this could be altered to a list of important/notable Sony products, such as the Walkman, Playstation, Betamax, Aibo? Linking to only products worthy of further discussion. ] 20:05, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Jetsam}}
*] - orphan, non article, short story -- ] 20:57, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - either original work, copvio, or vanity page - ] 23:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** It's a press release. Press on and release it from Wiki. Delete ] 10:00, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - move to 9-11 wiki. ] 21:29, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{WP:Votes for deletion/Knut_Lyngar}}
*] just a dictionary entry ] 23:26, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - discussion on whether to redirect or keep moved to ]


{{tl|VfD-True_Magic}}
* ] -- speedy deletion (dead-born; now orphan). ] 23:51, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
=== February 16 ===
*]. A list of one entry. I suppose this is to differentiate from ], ], ], ad nauseum? ] 04:23, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**ROFL - Delete - When do I get my page for ]? - ] 04:28, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**no do not delete - ]
**Added VfD tag - for full disclosure, ] is the creator of this article. - ] 04:51, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. ]
**Oof. Delete. Unless we can also add ]. ] 05:39, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Another ] - delete, before the plague spreads and we have a ] or something. ] 05:50, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, after seeing the porn lists above. (''Why? This is the fun of wikipedia! I was once very much against these things but now i think that you either delete them all, or keep them all. Keep: it will definetely grow.'')] 13:38, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***It may be the fun of Misplaced Pages for some, but for others the fun of wikipedia is writing an encyclopedia, not ].
****Thats not a comment to me, is it? ]
**Another tidbit - the article is now blank since someone pointed out that Britney's marriage was annulled, not divorced. - ] 14:17, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Where's the ]? Delete. ] 14:58, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. The title should at least be fixed to ]. If so, I would vote to keep, but this is of marginal importance. --] 15:57, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. I agree with ].


{{tl|VfD-Stepping-stone_democrat}}
*]. Also a list with only one entry. ]] 04:28, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**no do not delete - ]
***Why not?
**Delete - next I want a ] (Roseanne Barr had better not show up on this list.) - ] 04:35, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*** How about ]? At least it will have more than one entry (the 32k limit may be an issue though). PS: Delete. ] 05:26, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - and using... every... ounce of... self-control... not to put in my own "List of" joke here. ]
**Delete with extreme prejudice. ] 05:41, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - like ] or something equally ridiculous - ] 09:22, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Can these be made candidates for speedy deletion? Please? Waste of everyone's time. Delete! ] 05:50, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*** I second that - ] 09:22, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*** List are not candidates for speedy deletion and cannot be. ]
**Del, changed my mind (''Keep, same as above'')] 13:38, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Same as which above? Surely you don't mean "keep on grounds that it isn't a candidate for speedy deletion"? ] 11:52, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC) +ah, I see, you mean the next article up. Sorry. ]


====]====
*]. Dictionary definition. Moved to ]. ]] 05:14, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)


{{WP:Votes for deletion/Cap_N1ne}}
* ] - preemtive listing :) ] 05:43, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)


====]====
* ] -- yet another dot-com? ] 08:21, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Zappos? Zap it. Delete ] 09:58, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Phartcore_metal}}
* ] -- wiktionary entry ? ] 08:29, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
* all subpages of ] (e.g.]) -- index of another site. they don't make sense. ] 08:44, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete these index pages. A maintenance nightmare anyway. Users are better off visiting the Aozora Bunko website directly. ] 13:22, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** On the contrary, this is a useful index for stimulating articles in English on classic works of Japanese literature. Keep. -- ] 13:28, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-User195933412message}}
*] from the article: '"The Enemy Within" is the named used, in leiu of a better alternative, for the unnamed pilot episode for the American continuation of "Doctor Who"' (and the series wasn't picked up). A page for every failed pilot? I know that Dr. Who is a cult favorite, but really. ] 09:54, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep. I'm not a huge Dr Who fan, but this sort of info is interesting and useful. It's not just a failed pilot, it's a failed attempt to take a popular British show to America. That to me makes it a worthy entry, as it's not like it's just some obscure show that didn't make it, but something people would want to find out about. That said, the article itself needs work. ] 12:31, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Keep. Has a bunch of good info it'd be a shame to waste. ] 19:58, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*]. Just a one-liner duplicating the info given in the extlink. Seems to be not noteworthy at all. (I had thought the creator of that article wanted to flesh it out, but apparently not...) Delete. ] 12:22, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. This seems to be a cleanup request, rather than a deletion request. ] 15:48, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Kevin_Anderson}}
*] - Misplaced Pages is not pornopedia! ] 12:53, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Pleas note that this is NOT ], and this listing is this sock puppet's first posting. ] 20:22, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**<strike>Unless anyone can flesh these out, delete them. However, if someone can provide some actual info, they should stay. Articles about porn movies are fine, if they have content, and unfortunately these don't.</strike> Keep the porn articles. They are being fleshed out, so it's fine now. ] 12:56, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. No useful content, and I cannot see this developing into something useful. ] 13:17, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. useful content. ] 13:25, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. It's been expanded three times so far in just a few hours and is likely to be further expanded by those who do not agree that the Misplaced Pages should contain content intended only for children. ] 13:33, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - There are plenty of porn movie review sites - ] 14:07, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**] *hem* Where's the line? Does the average skin flick (] aside, of course) fall above the fuzzy threshold of noteworthiness? I would say that it does not, any more than does the average local garage band, so delete any that have no demonstrable claim to fame. (This applies to all the others, too, but I don't think copying it half a dozen times is really necessary.) --]] 14:19, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Doesn't the rule say it only has to be well known in its subject area, not generally well known? In which case, you'd have to ask an expert on porn whether this one is notable, because I have no idea. ] 14:38, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
****Well, if ] can indicate whether any of these films are noteworthy among the terminally hairy-palmed (with the necessary references of course), then I would say keep. Otherwise delete. --]] 14:52, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*****I was going to suggest a suitable candidate for performing such verification, but didn't think it polite. ;) ] 14:59, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**This particular article looks like it's getting fleshed out (no pun intended). Also, I'd like to say that "inappropriate for children" is '''NOT''' a reason to delete something, else we'd get rid of ], ], etc. ] 16:56, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. Insignificant. Sufficient to be listed in a ] or like. ] 18:30, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Nothing wrong with listing porn movies. I vote to keep on all of the porn movies listed below. ] 20:20, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep all the porn flicks. Take this is as my vote to keep all of them listed on this page. There is no reason to delete them, any more than there would be a reason to delete a non-porn flic. ] 20:55, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*** (note by ] 21:22, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC): there are two apparently redundant RickK entires because teh first was deleted by an edit conflict caused by Dandrake. In the interest of fidelity to what was actually written here, I am leaving both entries; RicKK is ''not'' trying to stuff the ballot box, as it were.)


====]====


{{tl|VfD-debate_stuffology}}
*] - for Gods sake, please! Misplaced Pages is read by children! ] 12:53, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Who reads WP is irrelevant, but this has no useful content and I think it is unlikely to ever acquire any. ] 13:17, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**useful for porn research. Keep. ] 13:25, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*** Adding more detail is the best way to get these kept - please do.:) ] 13:33, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. It was created hours before being listed here and is clearly going to be expanded. Anjela, the Misplaced Pages does not have children as it's sole audience, though we do not (yet) have a system for filtering ccontent suitable for the varying views of what children of various ages in various countries and of various religious and social beliefs may see. If you'd like to try to work out how to implement such a system, please feel free to do so, since we clearly will need it eventually. ] 13:33, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
*** Such a system already exists. It's generally marketed under the brand names ] and/or ] (in other words, it's a human problem, not a technological one). ] 14:46, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - There are plenty of porn movie review sites - ] 14:07, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Porn stubs can grow (see ], etc.) Keep. ] 16:56, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***The question is not whether it can grow, but should it. Copyright violations can grow... original works can grow... all sorts of things we don't want here could grow but are deleted because they are inappropriate. It isn't like you can't get the "blow by blow" at another porno review site. - ] 17:31, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. Insignificant. Sufficient to be listed in a ] or like. ] 18:30, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**<s>Delete, this is nonsense, she wasn't in a movie called &quot;Tracy Lords,&quot; she was just credited at that time under that spelling of her name. I suspect the rest of the articles 141 has created are also nonsense. </s>] 20:16, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Actually, when this article was first created, I went to imdb to look to see if this movie actually existed, and it is listed there, so unless the listing at imdb is wrong, this is a real movie. ] 20:25, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
****You're right...sorry, I looked there too but I didn't see it the first time. ] 20:33, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - do we need info on every single porn flick out there?? ] 12:53, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**No, we don't. Delete. No useful content. ] 13:17, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**yes we do. Keep. ] 13:25, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**What is with all the pron articles lately? And is ] a reincarnation of ]?. Delete. ] 13:47, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - There are plenty of porn movie review sites - ] 14:07, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. Insignificant. Sufficient to be listed in a ] or like. ] 18:30, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-debate_Trosh}}
*] - unmoral article, contains reference to unnatural love. ] 12:53, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Morality is not an issue. Nevertheless, delete: no useful content. ] 13:17, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. you keep stupid lists and you want delete movie articles? ] 13:25, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. It was created hours before being listed here and is clearly going to be expanded. ] 13:33, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**What is with all the pron articles lately? And is ] a reincarnation of ]?. Delete. ] 13:47, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - There are plenty of porn movie review sites - ] 14:07, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. Insignificant. Sufficient to be listed in a ] or like. ] 18:30, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - please no more porn spam. ] 12:53, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. ] 13:17, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. surely it will expand ] 13:25, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. It was created hours before being listed here and is clearly going to be expanded. ] 13:33, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**What is with all the pron articles lately? And is ] a reincarnation of ]?. Delete. ] 13:47, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - There are plenty of porn movie review sites - ] 14:07, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**''Delete''. This would appear to be utterly spurious, as according to the appropriate article, ] stopped "acting" in porn in 1985. --]] 14:41, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. Insignificant. Sufficient to be listed in a ] or like. ] 18:30, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Despite the original poster's claim, this is NOT a porn flick. Keep. ] 21:00, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Toas}}
*] - porn spam. ] 12:53, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. ] 13:17, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. let the stubs grow ] 13:25, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. It was created hours before being listed here and is clearly going to be expanded. ] 13:33, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**What is with all the pron articles lately? And is ] a reincarnation of ]?. Delete. ] 13:47, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - There are plenty of porn movie review sites - ] 14:07, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. This is not a pornopedia. ] 14:15, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**''Delete''. This would appear to be utterly spurious, as according to the appropriate article, ] stopped "acting" in porn in 1985. --]] 14:41, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete. Insignificant. Sufficient to be listed in a ] or like. ] 18:30, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Oh. Oh. Yeah. OH! YEAH! Yes! OH! Omigod! YEAH! DELETE! DELETE! DELETE! Ohhhhh, yeah. Wow. You were great. Delete. ] 18:58, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**''Delete'', possibly with every other article this guy has created. This one, at least, is complete nonsense. Traci Lords is in the (non-porn) movie Blade (the Wesley Snipes one). ] 20:10, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**In this case, I agree. This is not a porn movie. It's been redirected, but I've listed it on the redirects for deletion as it's incorrect to call it a porn movie. ] 21:51, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - another contribution by ]. Delete.
** Keep. The content is salvagable, and can potentially be worthwhile. Probably needs to be moved to a more appropriate name though. ] 14:07, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - we don't need a separate article for each variation - ] 14:09, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** This cannot be called a sexual practice. If anything it should be integrated into the below, but it certainly doesn't need its own page. ] 14:11, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. I see little academic merit in this. ] 14:15, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**This might be a section in ], but it doesn't deserve a stand-alone article. Delete. --]] 14:27, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. it doesn't matter who wrote it. You should judge by the content, not by the contributor. Please don't bite the newcomers. ] 14:40, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. At the utmost, might deserve a minor mention if the "swallowing" stuff gets merged into ]. ] 15:28, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Merge with ] and redirect, or keep. ] 16:56, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Merge. ] 18:37, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete unless the we change all titles with the slang word &quot;cum&quot; in them to &quot;semen&quot;. Note: this is not a content vote, but a format vote. ] 19:06, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**Redirect to ]. ] 21:52, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Jerome_War_Relocation_Center}}
*] -- and yet another contribution by ].
** Keep. The content is salvagable, and can potentially be worthwhile. Probably needs to be moved to a more appropriate name though. ] 14:07, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete - we don't need a separate article for each variation - ] 14:09, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Definitely needs a better name if it's going to stay, as well as some major NPOV and accuracy work. ] 14:11, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. I see little academic merit in this. ] 14:15, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**This might be a section in ], but it doesn't deserve a stand-alone article. Delete. --]] 14:27, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***It's actually mentioned in the fellatio section of that article ] 14:30, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. it doesn't matter who wrote it. You should judge by the content, not by the contributor. Please don't bite the newcomers. ] 14:40, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Some newcomers bring a mistake or two. Some newcomers bring boatloads of unwanted and inappropriate baggage. - ] 14:51, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete, move whatever is deemed salvageable to ]. ] 15:28, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Merge and redirect to ], or keep. ] 16:56, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Merge. ] 18:37, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Delete unless the we change all titles with the slang word &quot;cum&quot; in them to &quot;semen&quot;. Note: this is not a content vote, but a format vote. ] 19:06, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**Redirect to ]. ] 21:52, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - dictionary definition - and arguably inaccurate - example given: ''"cum swallowing in 1700s''" - Are we really to believe there is any documented proof of this claim? - ] 14:07, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. This is not a pornopedia. ] 14:15, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Needs serious help, but is article-worthy -- something examining the various legends regarding pacts with the devil could certainly be written. Keep. --]] 14:27, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** keep ] 14:40, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Tarppy}}
*] - do we really need this?
**I don't think so&mdash;for me, it's close to being nonsense. Delete. ] 15:28, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. --] 15:36, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete. Dictionary definition. ] 17:15, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====] and ]====
*] - orphaned article about a minor road on a housing estate in Aylesbury. Hardly encyclopedia material. -- ] 16:35, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Jochen_Köhler}}
*] - orphan, have merged the content into ] from this incorrectly named article (the text was about the church rather than the parish) so wouldn't serve much use even as a redirect. -- ] 16:58, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


=== May 26 ===
*] - I'm not sure if this is an original work or a copyright violation but there are clear cut-and-paste errors. - ] 17:35, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
====]====
**Creating user has blanked page, so this is probably ready for deletion - ] 17:39, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Also appears to be a copyvio. - ] 17:54, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-debate_White_nationalist_FAQ}}
*]. This belongs in Wiktionary. ] 17:49, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
** Wait. 8:42 minutes after creation it's on VfD?! Give it time, most great novels weren't written overnight. ] 19:52, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====], ], ], ], ]====
*] - Anthony irrelevance. --] 17:52, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Somewhat well-known and of marginal significance, but enough to keep. --] 18:19, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Delete this but put the info back in ] where it was originally. The song doesn't deserve its own article, but then this article wouldn't have been created if someone (bet you can't guess who) hadn't been reverting the WWJD article. ] 18:43, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Agree with Daniel, plus this is a stub which can be improved. ] 18:50, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**My vote was deleted. Please don't delete votes that aren't yours. ] 20:15, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC) Old vote:
**Merge with the Music heading of ]. ] 18:55, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**Oppose , until some reason is given for its deletion. ] 19:46, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**Keep. Wik only listed it here because Anthony created it, and Wik is on a war against Anthony. ] 19:51, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**But then we should probably question why Anthony created it...the content should probably be moved to the South Park movie article, and then WWBBD redirected there. ] 20:07, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-Sexdecillion}}
*] - doesn't merit its own article IMO. ] | ] 18:07, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)
**Keep but needs cleaning up. Apparently this has become a real event since invention by the makers of the Simpsons... -- ] 18:20, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


====]====
*] - apparently advertising, no reason for an article with this name. ] 18:36, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
**This and ] were created because ] had links created to them; presumably a kind person helpfully created the missing articles and put the references in them. I fixed up ] so these two are now orphans. ] 18:47, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
***Thanks, I didn't realize the context. ] 19:02, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


{{tl|VfD-footjob}}
*] - What's this? Junk? -- ] 20:53, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)

**Gobbledygook. Delete. ] 21:57, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
====]====

{{tl|VfD-Star_of_the_County_Down2}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-William_Guzzardi}}

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/David_Pearce}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-Hedonistic_imperative}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-Nick_Bostrom}}

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/World_Transhumanist_Association}}

==== ] ====

{{tl|VfD-Michael_H_Hart}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-HaifaLinuxClub}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-Paul_McKeever}}

====] and ]====

{{tl|VfD-Poof}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-NaturalHygiene}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-Chelation-therapy}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-Karmann}}

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/Thinkism}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-LUX}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-Arab_Khamula}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-Partit_Nacionalista_Liberal_de_Catalunya}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-UNaXcess}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-Cairns_State_High_School}}

=== May 27 ===
====]====

{{tl|VfD-Very_large_numbers}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-Guanica-Bay}}

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/Vollis}}

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/Disassociate}}

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/MrBits}}

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/Quantumphasetransition}}

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/List_of_people_who_have_not_committed_suicide}}

====] and ]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/KassandraHiroshima}}

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/A_Smith}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-Digivolve}}

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/Nothlit_Animorphs}}

=== May 28 ===
====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/Heck}}

====]====

{{tl|VfD-Mudgik}}


Apologies, was not logged in.

I do not expect you to understand the importance a mutable archive of Mudgik would provide the Mudgik community. The remark is blunderous; importance is relative.

It is not a ] it was a ].

It exists today in two forms (I am still researching them).



For more MUDs that aren't 'that important' please see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/MUD#Popular_MU*s


Keepers. ] 04:09, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/Claire_Chow}}

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/Bikeshed}}

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/Advanet}}

====]====
Is there going to be one of these for every Grand Slam in every year? By the end of the year, will there be four of these on the ] page with eighty names listed? At the end of five years, will there be twenty of them on her page? ]] 04:03, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

====]====

{{WP:Votes for deletion/Miscible}}

==VfD Footer section==
<!-- ************************************************************* -->
<!-- ************* Add new entries above this section************* -->
<!-- ************************************************************* -->
{{VfDFooter}}
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 20:07, 14 October 2024

This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference.
Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus on its purpose has become unclear. To revive discussion, seek broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

This page contains the page history of Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion from 22:22, 15 May 2002 (UTC) to 06:24, 28 May 2004 (UTC).

This is an archived copy of VfD. Please see Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion for the current active version.

Shorthand:
WP:VFD

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 Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages.
  • 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


28 - 27 - 26 - 25 - 24 - 23 - 22 - 22 - 21 - 20 - 19 - 18 - 17

{{VfD_frontmatter}}

Decisions in progress

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

May 23

Kimberley Katherine Smith

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-KKSmith}}

Hanyô, Hanyou, Hanyo, Hanyoo

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Hanyo}}

Circumfetishism

-->>>>>> Deletion debate

Glad

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Glad}}

Kyb IE GetEmAll

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Kyb_IE_GetEmAll}}

AberSeeSaw

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-AberSeeSaw}}

Ben Wilson

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-BenWilson}}

Metarmorphosis

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Metarmorphosis}}

Weston Lullingfields

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-WestonLullingfields}}

College Road

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-CollegeRoad}}

Nutty Norman

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-NuttyNorman}}

David Barker

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-DavidBarker}}

CheShA

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-CheShA}}

Alt.tv.simpsons

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Alt_tv_simpsons}}

Dumbarton Harp F.C.

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-DumbartonHarpFC}}

Sean Flowers

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Sean_Flowers}}

The Black and White Space Marine on the Black and White Bike

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-The_Black_and_White_Space_Marine_on_the_Black_and_White_Bike}}

Ambiversion

add to this deletion debate

dicdef. Had vfd added on May 23, does not seem to have made it here. Ianb 23:29, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Nalgene

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Nalgene}}

Elena Filatova

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Elena_Filatova}}

Call of Duty: United Offensive

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Call_of_Duty_United_Offensive}}

Political terrorism

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Political_terrorism}}

Alphabetical List of Hoboken streets

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Alphabetical_List_of_Hoboken_streets}}

May 24

Social surplus

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Social_surplus}}

Expression engine

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Expression_engine}}

The egg and the chicken problem

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-The_egg_and_the_chicken_problem}}

Vince_Buffalo

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Vince_Buffalo}}

...The Press!

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-ThePress}}

Guff

add to this deletion debate

Guff 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 delete

Guff

Dictdef for foreign language. Possible candidate to move to Wiktionary. →Iñgólemo← (talk) 07:49, 2004 Dec 5 (UTC)

  • Delete: Extremely suspicious dictdef: "Guff" is a common AmEng word for "sass, disrespectful speech," and the citation in this article is to Madame Blavatsky's group. Geogre 15:17, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete In English, guff means nonsense, which describes this article. Wyss 18:49, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • No Preference Guff is English. It comes from the Hebrew language as most english words originate from other languages. The description is accurate for English, but as mentioned above, perhaps does not cover all the ways the word is used. In "Madame Blavatsky's group" and quite possibly other groups, this is the meaning of the word. Knightt 19:21, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. dictdef. --MPerel 21:03, Dec 9, 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.

Chung Ling Record

add to this deletion debate

Similar to Wan Ling Record. This was contributed by a user who was only around for one day and added only quotes. This article consists entirely of, not surprisingly, a series of quotes. - Nat Krause 14:18, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete. It's a name of some Buddhist text and this looks like a collection of quotes from it. I would be glad if Misplaced Pages had articles about Buddhist texts but they should be in encyclopedic style. Not collections of quotes without any explanation. Andris 14:52, May 24, 2004 (UTC)

Chinese cannibalism

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Chinese_cannibalism}}

Iraq Liberation Act

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Iraq_Liberation_Act}}

SchneersonQuotes

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-SchneersonQuotes}}

Yayhooray

add to this deletion debate

Yayhooray

Text copied from front page of the site (Alexa rank of 127,106) which is the subject of this page. I'm uncertain whether the site is notable enough to have an article, but the current content is just an ad. — A.M. 18:30, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete. Advertisement for website. Also now listed as a copyvio, but that's irrelevant if we delete it anyway. No evidence that the site is encyclopedic, although it appears to be well done at first glance IMO. Andrewa 20:23, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete Ad Wyss 20:24, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete Ad Trust 20:25, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete Ad Brody 20:25, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete Ad MAtty 20:28, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Ad Jayjg 20:34, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: Ad, and Misplaced Pages is not a web guide. Geogre 22:10, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Absolutely, positively delete. ] 17:27, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Flashback to May: deleted 3-0. The previous version of the page is apparently no longer in the undelete database, so I can't say that it is a repost of the same material (which would make it a speedy). No vote. --rbrwr 14:43, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • keep - highly relevant to the web development and graphic design community's history
  • Obviously worthless. --YixilTesiphon
  • Relevant as documentation of an experiment in self moderation and community building online. mrRed

Uppercase Day

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-UppercaseDay}}

Misplaced Pages:Who

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Wikipedia_Who}}

Canadian gun registry

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Canadian_gun_registry}}

May 25

Jason_Richey

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Jason_Richey}}

CCITT X.409 '84

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-debate_CCITT_X_409_84}}

Bandwagon Oklahoma Music and BandwagonOK

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Bandwagon_Oklahoma_Music}}

Tom Jackson

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Tom_Jackson}}

Windermere Real Estate

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Windermere_Real_Estate}}

Robert Kyle Wilson

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Robert_Kyle_Wilson}}

Massage_Therapy_School_-_NMSNT

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Massage_Therapy_School_-_NMSNT}}

Jetsam

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Jetsam}}

Knut_Lyngar

add to this deletion debate

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

The result was Update: I count 4 votes to delete. I'll delete the page now. Wile E. Heresiarch 16:35, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

Knut_Lyngar

vanity page. Name gets 6 google hits. Zoda, who wrote this page, is Knut Lyngar's nickname according to . Maximus Rex 07:49, 25 May 2004 (UTC)

  • Greet new user. Then delete and remove image too. Dunc Harris | Talk 12:48, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Vanity. Andrewa 14:44, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. City where his radio station is (Elverum) only has 18,000 inhabitants. According to our article on the county it's in (Hedmark) says it only has 4.1% of the population of Norway. We may want to clarify a policy on radio DJs. Most have 5,000+ listeners, but, other than Howard Stern and some others, I believe most listeners tune in for the station's format, not the DJ. (PS One of the Yahoo hits is this VfD listing. lol) Niteowlneils 15:51, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
FWIW, I've added "Non-syndicated radio disc-jockeys that haven't become a major news item due to controversy, etc. Out." to WIWO. Niteowlneils 19:27, 27 May 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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

True Magic

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-True_Magic}}

Stepping-stone democrat

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Stepping-stone_democrat}}

Cap N1ne

add to this deletion debate

Non-notable musician. Name only gets two Google hits as a musician and one as an album cover designer. RickK 20:51, Jul 25, 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete musical vanity/self-promotion. -- Cyrius|✎ 00:28, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. SWAdair | Talk 02:44, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete vanity. Since bands are all out of business and rappers and DJ's are in business, I suppose that means that we'll be getting 4 times the number of these articles, now. Geogre 03:31, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • I listed it as a speedy since this same article was deleted a couple of months ago. Can we make it go away again? - Lucky 6.9 18:27, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Phartcore_metal

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Phartcore_metal}}

User:195.93.34.12/message

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-User195933412message}}

Kevin_Anderson

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Kevin_Anderson}}

Stuffology

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-debate_stuffology}}

Trosh

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-debate_Trosh}}

Toas

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Toas}}

Jerome War Relocation Center

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Jerome_War_Relocation_Center}}

Tarppy

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Tarppy}}

Ulrike Köhler and Jochen Köhler

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Jochen_Köhler}}

May 26

White nationalist FAQ

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-debate_White_nationalist_FAQ}}

Sexdecillion, Quattuordecillion, Quindecillion, Tredecillion, Undecillion

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Sexdecillion}}

footjob

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-footjob}}

Star of the County Down

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Star_of_the_County_Down2}}

William Guzzardi

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-William_Guzzardi}}

David Pearce

add to this deletion debate

David Pearce 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 keep the article.

I know that this article has been listed on VFD twice already, but you guys need to understand what is going on with this article:

This article is obvious googlebombing with the links, each "article" is really a link to one of the many thousands of domains this guy owns. These links are also found in many other related articles. Im sure David Pierce or an associate himself has been adding most of these links.

This guy owns these domain names: http://www.hedweb.com/paradise.html

By owning such a gigantic amount of cross linking domain names, his websites dominate many drug searches on google. David Pearce thus then might be notable enough for these facts, but these facts were removed from the article.

edit by the guy who put this on vfd:

Don't believe this guy is notable because of articles or interviews mentioned here, notice that most of those are hosted on his own websites so they are questionable. He might very well be notable for the gigantic amount of domain names he owns, all with some form of original content on them, which tend to dominate many search results, especially for obscure drugs. The problem is however, it is very likely him or a friend who created this article, or added the links to it, so its always a very potentially dangerous article.

  • (Above unsigned entry is from User:67.180.61.179).
  • David Pearce is a British visionary...bwhuaahaa...oh vanity alright. Delete. Wyllium 19:58, 2004 Nov 13 (UTC)
  • Delete or edit down to stubbitude. --jpgordon{gab} 19:11, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • As it is, it's nothing but a link farm. Delete. DS 19:30, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. silsor 19:41, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Promotional. Slightly off-topic, but people might want to take a look at Talk:American World University#Handling promotional links. I'm suggesting that whenever someone has qualms about the promotional effect of a link but wish to preserve it as a service to readers, that it be replaced with a substitute from tinyurl or similar services. To my surprise, this is a controversial suggestion, but I'd like to explore it further or see whether others have better ideas. ] 19:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: Hooooooo boy those are some links! Putting nowiki in front of all of them works well, and while the article is on VfD, we're supposed to do that anyway. I'd almost have seen this speedied for patent nonsense. He wants to "abolish the chemical substrates of suffering?" What? I suffer, but I'm not sure it's on a chemical substratum level. Geogre 20:08, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • "the abolition of the chemical substrates of suffering in all sentient life.". Um, okay. Even if we got rid of the excessive links, this language itself makes it delete-worthy. Delete. RickK 20:58, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. --DMG413 22:22, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete Jayjg 12:04, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Vanity, Promo --Improv 15:38, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: vanity, promo. Wile E. Heresiarch 04:50, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Since Pearce is obviously a notable figure, the most sensible thing to do would be to shorten the bibliography section and delete all its links, which I have done. Loremaster 20:09, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
    • What is your evidence supporting the judgement "obviously a notable figure"? I'll admit that I don't see it and consider this currently a delete candidate. Rossami (talk) 06:02, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
      • As a leading figure in a movement that is getting increasing media, academic and political attention, Pearce should have an article. And, since the controversial content has been edited out of the article, this dispute is now moot. Loremaster 16:59, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
      • I'm not sure if I would call Pearce a "obviously notable figure", but his major work, The Hedonistic Imperative, is well-known within transhumanist communities. -- Schaefer 20:49, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Yes, this was quite likely created as a vanity page, but if the links can be kept off, it shouldn't be a problem. I'll admit that his only well-known writing is The Hedonistic Imperative, so while there's no profound need for a page just about him, the page has been edited to the point where it's no longer just blatant self-promotion. -- Schaefer 20:36, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. If this was created as a vanity page, it was not done by David Pearce or his associates - I know this fact personally. Some people are quick to play down the notability of others for obvious reasons. Given that there is no such thing as an unbiased attribution of value or notability - we should instead thank this fellow for his pioneering and visionary work. Ask yourselves if the abolition of suffering is more important than one's contribution to an impossibly "unbiased" collection, life is short.Sean Henderson 22:20, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Note that Sean Henderson is the name of one of David Pearce's associates (as mentioned in the article)67.180.61.179 02:01, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. While I find a great deal to dispute with the man and most of the Transhumanist movement I think at least from with in the movement his works are discussed and he's moderately well known. Notable? I hope not, but I wouldn't make that judgment for anyone else. —Florescentbulb 02:56, 19 Nov 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.

Hedonistic imperative

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Hedonistic_imperative}}

Nick Bostrom

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Nick_Bostrom}}

World Transhumanist Association

add to this deletion debate

World Transhumanist Association 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 keep the article.

If David Pearce gets vfd'd, his organization ought to get put up for a vote as well. --DMG413 15:30, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

  • KEEP. This organization has been getting some significant attention due to the public interest in, and press coverage of, transhumanism. Let's not get carried away due to the problems with the David Pierce article. Loremaster 16:01, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • I'd rather not delete it for guilt by association, but what does this article actually say? It says, "WTA was founded by X & Y. It's goals are good. See the following 6 links." Abstain, pending any indication of notability whatever for anything good (as opposed to infamy for being a spam factory). Geogre 19:42, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Definitely notable. --Improv 20:04, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. I don't like that logic, we can't eliminate anything just because its creator is non-notable. - Lifefeed 21:12, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep for reasons stated by Loremaster. GRider 23:05, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Pearce's notability is questionable, but I consider the co-founder Nick Bostrom notable and the WTA itself even more so. -- Schaefer 21:08, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Definite keep. I would like to see some expansion though, maybe on the lines of what sets this transhumanist group apart or makes it unique among the others. Any takers? Inky 04:51, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, and BAH! on Transhumanists. —Florescentbulb 03:59, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete link repository. Might as well say North Valley Clown Alley was founded by Bongo the Clown and other clowns. They win awards. Everyone loves clowns. See the following 8 clown web pages. and y'all know I love clowns. Pedant 08:04, 2004 Nov 19 (UTC)
  • Keep, strongly disagree with Pedant's analogy here. Stop clowning around, deletionism is serious business. ] 17:52, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - Trollminator 21:40, 19 Nov 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.

Michael H. Hart

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Michael_H_Hart}}

Haifa Linux Club

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-HaifaLinuxClub}}

Paul_McKeever

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Paul_McKeever}}

Poof and Pouffe

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Poof}}

Natural Hygiene

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-NaturalHygiene}}

Chelation therapy

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Chelation-therapy}}

Karmann

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Karmann}}

Thinkism

add to this deletion debate

Old discussion from VfD

Discussion concluded on June 1, 2004

Note: There are remnants of other VfD discussions in page history. jni 07:53, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Thinkism

Vanity. No Alexa data , no indication on website that there are any other members of this "art movement" besides David Kam. - Hephaestos|§ 20:43, 26 May 2004 (UTC)

LUX

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-LUX}}

Arab Khamula

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Arab_Khamula}}

Partit Nacionalista Liberal de Catalunya

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Partit_Nacionalista_Liberal_de_Catalunya}}

UNaXcess

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-UNaXcess}}

Cairns State High School

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Cairns_State_High_School}}

May 27

Very large numbers

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Very_large_numbers}}

Guánica Bay

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Guanica-Bay}}

Vollis

add to this deletion debate

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled Vollis.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the article.

Vollis is a team game/sport, invented, first played and coined in 2002 AD. Vollis is set to grow quite large in the near future and there is a distinct possibility that it could be an Olympic sport by 2012-2016. I can't find any references via google. Vollis doesn't seem to be notable enough for an article in wikipedia. Thue 14:25, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete. The final claim that it may be an Olympic sport by 2012 is patent nonsense, and contributes to the impression that this is just a sport thought up by a bunch of kids, and that it hasn't spread much outside that group. Also, a search for the word 'vollis' on search engines produces large numbers of hits for a folk artist called Vollis Simpson, but nothing related to this game. Average Earthman 16:28, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
  • "2002 AD," no less. Delete as patent nonsense. - Lucky 6.9 18:45, 27 May 2004
  • Delete - Tεxτurε 19:13, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
  • Looks like nonsense. Delete. -- Cyrius|&#9998 19:35, May 27, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Nonsense. Abigail 21:30, May 27, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep it, even if the assumption is made that kids or some other people you wish to call unnotable invented it, how do you think sports that are played worldwide began? Isn't the Misplaced Pages a place for people to access any information of interest? If you can't find it on Google after idly clicking around, think of how difficult it would be for someone to find it out of genuine interest (rather than cynicism) without the Misplaced Pages article? Boutros Boutros
    • I just adore sockpuppets. They're so cute and cuddly. - Lucky 6.9 16:51, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
    • Just to answer the claim by a poster who has never posted anywhere else - apart from the fact that the majority of 'vanity' articles on Misplaced Pages are contributed by teenagers who appear to lack a proper sense of perspective, the utter obscurity of the game means it is not currently worthy including. As for 'if you can't find it on Google after idly clicking', I used both Google and Teoma, and found only articles about Vollis Simpson or pages in German which my admittedly abysmal grasp of German suggests to me are about some form of table football, one mention of the chairman of the President of the Pan-Macedonian Association, and one reference to US soldier with the surname 'Vollis'. Happy now? Average Earthman 17:44, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
    • Well well well, contempt for developing games, disregard for new users to web communities, dislike of teenagers.........Sounds to me like you have a touch of conservative elitism in you. Some people obviously feel uncomfortable when there's changes happening in the world that upset ideals of a concrete state of reality...Fair enough, you can't find the thing on Google, still I think this site's entire purpose is for information, or am I wrong? Boutros Boutros
      • Information, yes, but information about somewhat established stuff of generel interest, ie informative stuff. There is no indication that vollis has grown outside the group of teenagers who invented it. The problem is also that the information is not verifiable. Delete the article for now, but if vollis ever gets widespread we should have an article about it. Thue 09:15, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. If it becomes widely known, we can recreate it, but it does not merit an article now. Andris 02:02, Jun 1, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. For verification see this News thread from 1994, or this google search. It seems it is not only a game but also a bicycle brand. Why don't you deletists work on verifiing these things instead of just listing stuff all the time. Boutros Boutross point is a very good one, even though it doesn't look like this term was coined in 2002....
    • No. I looked through google hits from your search (ones which were in English). There is exactly 1 hit about vollis game. The rest are mostly about people with first/last name being Vollis. 1 google hit does not justify inclusion. Andris 19:50, Jun 2, 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.

Disassociate

add to this deletion debate

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 NO CONSENSUS. Postdlf 23:38, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Disassociate

This had a VFD before that stated keep; although it's mentioned in Allmusic.com (according to User:Wyllium), the article itself is dead-end. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 04:51, May 29, 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 the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

Mr.Bits

add to this deletion debate

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled Mr.Bits.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the article.

Orphan, dubious. Unvarifiable, vanity or prank? Top google hits for "Mr.Bits" don't seem relevant. Zero google hits for the terms Mr.Bits Chicago Comedian together, no hits for "The Bits & Clone Show", Bitskateers. -- Infrogmation 18:34, 27 May 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.

Quantum phase transition

add to this deletion debate

Either this is a real term presented poorly or it's the greatest piece of quackery I've ever seen here. Is there a physicist in the house? - Lucky 6.9 18:38, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

  • From what (little) physics I know I can't find any inaccuracies. I think it would be more appropriate to list this at Misplaced Pages:Pages_needing_attention. I have listed it there. Thue 18:56, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
  • Real term poorly presented. Move to Clean-up. I'll try if/when I can find my old textbooks. Rossami 20:59, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
  • "Quantum phase transition" gets over 7000 google hits. Clicking on a few google hits suggest that the page isn't blatent nonsense. I don't know enough of quantum physics to know how accurate the information is - but since I lack the knowledge to judge the accuracy, I won't vote for delete. Abigail 21:04, May 27, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Real phenomenon. Not a good VfD listing IMO, we should be listing and voting on things we do know something about (as others have said more gently). There are other places for asking questions. As Misplaced Pages grows this becomes more and more important. Andrewa 21:09, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
  • In either case it doesn't belong on VfD. If it is a real term presented poorly, it is still clearly a encyclopedic topic and doesn't belong on VfD. On the other hand, if the person who posted the VfD request doesn't understand the topic well enough to determine if it is "quackery", it doesn't belong on VfD. Keep. ElBenevolente 21:16, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
  • That's perfectly OK with me. It's not that I didn't understand the topic. It was so badly written that I simply couldn't comprehend what I was reading. There was a patently nonsensical article here last week that was couched in pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo. I wasn't certain if this was the same sort of thing, hence my electing to bring it here. It's already on "pages needing attention," so by all means, keep. And let's try and keep the personal attacks to a minimum, OK? - Lucky 6.9 21:34, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment - Mikkalai has revised the article. It's certainly more readable now, anyway. Average Earthman 17:48, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

List of people who have not committed suicide

add to this deletion debate

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled List of people who have not commited suicide.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the article.

The most ridiculous list of people I have seen here so far, as everyon not on List of people who commited suicide can be listed there. I was tempted to delete it by speedy deletion directly as being patent nonsense. andy 20:12, 27 May 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.

Kassandra Hiroshima and Kassandra HiroshimA

add to this deletion debate

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the pages entitled Kassandra Hiroshima and Kassandra HiroshimA.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the articles.

Ladies and gentlemen. Presented for your voting pleasure is an individual of eclectic background who garners an incredible two hits on Google, both referring back to his/her own articles on other sites. - Lucky 6.9 21:46, 27 May 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.

A. Smith

add to this deletion debate

Cannot be found on either Allmusic.com or Google. Vanity? --Wyllium 21:58, 2004 May 27 (UTC)

Digivolve

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Digivolve}}

Nothlit (Animorphs)

add to this deletion debate

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled Nothlit (Animorphs).

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to move the article to Nothlit, merge and redirect to Animorphs (book series), and delete the redirect from Nothlit (Animorphs).

There's nothing in this article that actually means anything, and even what it appears to mean is too trivial to be worth mentioning. Tonusperegrinus 22:27, 27 May 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.

May 28

Heck

add to this deletion debate

See also Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Heck/old

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 keep. This doesn't preclude redirect, but there isn't a consensus to redirect. --Tony Sidaway 13:45, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Heck

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.

Mudgik

add to this deletion debate

{{VfD-Mudgik}}


Apologies, was not logged in.

I do not expect you to understand the importance a mutable archive of Mudgik would provide the Mudgik community. The remark is blunderous; importance is relative.

It is not a website it was a MUD.

It exists today in two forms (I am still researching them).


For more MUDs that aren't 'that important' please see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/MUD#Popular_MU*s


Keepers. Yeago 04:09, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

Claire Chow

add to this deletion debate

Delete - as the pages states, a student who works for Canada customs at Lester Pearson Airport. Burgundavia 03:31, May 28, 2004 (UTC)

It's already gone. RickK 03:32, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

Bikeshed

add to this deletion debate

Dicdef of a slang term. And if it were to be kept, it should be moved to Bikeshedding. RickK 03:46, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

Advanet

add to this deletion debate

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled Advanet.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the article.

Some explanation? What is it? Is this worth keeping? RickK 03:54, 28 May 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.

Template:Top seeds for French Open 2004

Is there going to be one of these for every Grand Slam in every year? By the end of the year, will there be four of these on the Serena Williams page with eighty names listed? At the end of five years, will there be twenty of them on her page? RickK 04:03, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

Miscible

add to this deletion debate

Dicdef. Meelar 04:22, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

VfD Footer section

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 Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages 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 ]. 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 ]. 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 ]. 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}} ~~~~
Category: