Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Battle Field 2: 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:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:06, 20 July 2006 editHunter91 (talk | contribs)139 edits removed biased content that may influence voteing← Previous edit Latest revision as of 13:39, 10 March 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
(38 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page. ''
<!--Template:Afd top

Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''delete'''. There is nothing to merge. ]<i>::</i><small>]</small> 11:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
===]=== ===]===
*This article has been merged to ] as of 22:06 July 23, 2006. -] 21:41, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Dispute on talk page as to whether the page should be merged in ] or just deleted.
Dispute on talk page as to whether the page should be merged in ] or just deleted. The article is badly written, contains virtually no information already included in ] and should be deleted and '''redirected''', judging by the poor quality of its contents and the lack of useful info. ] 20:22, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
**Nom had material removed by {{user|Hunter91}}, now put back ] 22:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Merge''' any worthwile content (I'm not sure that there is) then '''Redirect''' ] 20:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC) *'''Merge''' any worthwile content (I'm not sure that there is) then '''Redirect''' ] 20:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
*Just plain '''Delete'''. ] 22:24, 18 July 2006 (UTC) *Just plain '''Delete'''. ] 22:24, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''redirect''' probable search term. Not really seeing anything worth merging. --] 23:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC) *'''redirect''' probable search term. Not really seeing anything worth merging. --] 23:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

*'''Merge''' this page should be merged it has valuable contrabutions and a vandal delted the icon for it to be merged. {{unsigned|Hunter91}}
*'''Merge''' this page should be merged it has valuable contrabutions and a vandal delted the icon for it to be merged. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
**'''Comment''' I removed the merge template replacing it with an AfD, as with an afd the decision can be merge. As I wrote in my nom, there was a lack of consensus on the talk page which is why I took the steps which I have done. ] 15:23, 19 July 2006 (UTC) **'''Comment''' I removed the merge template replacing it with an AfD, as with an afd the decision can be merge. As I wrote in my nom, there was a lack of consensus on the talk page which is why I took the steps which I have done. ] 15:23, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
⚫ * '''Redirect''' to ], or just '''Delete'''. <font face="verdana"><small>]</small><nowiki>]</sup>|<sub>]</sub></font>] 15:30, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
**this page should be merged as it has been the victim of vandals determined to muck up anything i contribute to because for some reason they have a personal vendetta against me.--] 17:31, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

⚫ * '''Redirect''' to ], or just '''Delete'''. <span style="font-family:verdana;"><small>]</small><nowiki>]</sup>|<sub>]</sub></span>] 15:30, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Change the page name to 'A political history of Islam' then we will have a far more constructive artical. --] 19:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


**'''Comment''' - What on earth is going on here - do NOT delete votes - if you feel a user is a sockpuppet, then you should comment on it, not remove the vote made by the editor. --] 22:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' "battle field 2", everything mentioned in original is alot better--General Oumrov 14:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC) - This was deleted by another editor and I am trying to ensure this vote is counted --] 22:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

** '''Delete''' This page is useless and has a much better predessor. --] 14:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC) - This voted was deleted by {{user|Hunter91}}. See Charlesknight's comment above. ] 22:40, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' There doesn't appear to be anything to merge. ] 07:21, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

'''Delete''' What is the fuss about this. Delete it! There is nothing really need to merge. Perhaps hunter91 or another conributor can copy a couple of lines. Apart from that it really isn't neccessary. Hunter91, should also watch out how he is treating other users. U do not delete other peoples opinion. They can voice their own opinion. If u do suspect them of vandalism or a sock puppet, take it up with an administrator. It makes u look like a vandaliser yourself otherwise!--] 12:13, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

**'''Comment''' litraly all these votes are by the same people but have created other sock puppet acounts i suggest the votting should be disgarded and admin should decide becasue this is simpley ridiculous i have recived about 10 e-mails from the vandals who openly admit to me and have to other users such as ] to being sock puppet acounts many admin also recognise these acounts as sock puppets and are trying to get them banned.
--] 13:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

**'''Comment''' Which Admin? Where is this discussed? --] 15:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

*'''Merge''' this page has usefull contributions and has been the victim of vandals who wish to have it deleted. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small>
**'''Comment''' This IP votes twice in this afd discussion (see below). ] 22:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

*'''Delete'''' I can see nothing worth keeping, alternatly you could change the page name to 'A political history of Islam' as i recomended, as it would probably reduce the probability of anybody accidentally stumbling upon the page.--] 14:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

*'''Delete'''' Having checked out both this page and the battlefield 2 page - I say delete - this page is not needed. --] 15:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

**'''Comment''' charles knight it was discussed on my talk page and you have voted twice please remove the second vote this is exactly what i am talking about you are a vandal with sock puppet acounts trying to influece the voting and now you have voted twice! --] 17:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
***'''Comment''' I would respectfully request that a) you refrain from calling people Sockpuppets and b) you carefully check the page before making such remarks I have voted ONCE. --] 17:22, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' I do not know Charlesknight, but having worked with him on other articles, he seems an upright and honest user and if he does have sockpuppets, he would not use them here. ]


*'''Delete'''' There is no need for this article. We already have one on it. ] 17:19, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

**'''Comment''' the above vote was done by a sock puppet--] 17:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

***'''Comment''' How dare you accuse me of being a sock puppet! I'm now reporting you to an admin. I am fed up with this. ] 19:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
****'''Comment''' Seriphyn is not a sock puppet of anyone. His editing style does not match any other user involved in this dispute; I can also vouch for him, as a disinterested user(check my contributions, by all means), as I know him offline and he does not have any sockpuppets. ] 20:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

*'''Merge''' has decent content that could be usefull. <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
**'''Comment''' This IP votes twice in this afd discussion (see above). ] 22:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

*'''Strong Delete''' This is not only not the name of the game, it is poorly written and the article already exists under the game's correct name. ] 20:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

*'''Merge''' if any non-duplicated content can be found, otherwise '''Redirect'''. According to ]: Redirects are used to "''aid searches on certain terms''" and to "''make the creation of duplicate articles less likely...by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term''". Removing the content of the page isn't the same as deleting it. If you are voting to delete because you deel that ] is more appropriate, please consider the possibility of redirecting if you haven't already. Redirects are cheap and creating one at this title wouldn't be harmful per WP:REDIRECT. This is a possible search term so it should be kept per ].&mdash;]&bull;] 21:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

**'''Comment''' Point; a redirect is suitable as 'Battle Field 2' is a possible search term, as said. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) {{{2|}}}.</small>

*'''Redirect''' to ] as a valid search term. ] <sub style="color:red;"><small>( ]</small></sub> <sub>]</sub> <sub style="color:blue;"><small>] )</small></sub> 17:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

Latest revision as of 13:39, 10 March 2023

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

The result was delete. There is nothing to merge. Proto::type 11:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Battle Field 2

Dispute on talk page as to whether the page should be merged in Battlefield 2 or just deleted. The article is badly written, contains virtually no information already included in Battlefield 2 and should be deleted and redirected, judging by the poor quality of its contents and the lack of useful info. Martinp23 20:22, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Merge this page should be merged it has valuable contrabutions and a vandal delted the icon for it to be merged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hunter91 (talk • contribs)
    • Comment I removed the merge template replacing it with an AfD, as with an afd the decision can be merge. As I wrote in my nom, there was a lack of consensus on the talk page which is why I took the steps which I have done. Martinp23 15:23, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
    • this page should be merged as it has been the victim of vandals determined to muck up anything i contribute to because for some reason they have a personal vendetta against me.--Hunter91 17:31, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Change the page name to 'A political history of Islam' then we will have a far more constructive artical. --Mr blobby 19:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


    • Comment - What on earth is going on here - do NOT delete votes - if you feel a user is a sockpuppet, then you should comment on it, not remove the vote made by the editor. --Charlesknight 22:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete "battle field 2", everything mentioned in original is alot better--General Oumrov 14:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC) - This was deleted by another editor and I am trying to ensure this vote is counted --Charlesknight 22:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Delete What is the fuss about this. Delete it! There is nothing really need to merge. Perhaps hunter91 or another conributor can copy a couple of lines. Apart from that it really isn't neccessary. Hunter91, should also watch out how he is treating other users. U do not delete other peoples opinion. They can voice their own opinion. If u do suspect them of vandalism or a sock puppet, take it up with an administrator. It makes u look like a vandaliser yourself otherwise!--Chombawomba 12:13, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

    • Comment litraly all these votes are by the same people but have created other sock puppet acounts i suggest the votting should be disgarded and admin should decide becasue this is simpley ridiculous i have recived about 10 e-mails from the vandals who openly admit to me and have to other users such as David Comley to being sock puppet acounts many admin also recognise these acounts as sock puppets and are trying to get them banned.

--Hunter91 13:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete' I can see nothing worth keeping, alternatly you could change the page name to 'A political history of Islam' as i recomended, as it would probably reduce the probability of anybody accidentally stumbling upon the page.--Mr blobby 14:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment charles knight it was discussed on my talk page and you have voted twice please remove the second vote this is exactly what i am talking about you are a vandal with sock puppet acounts trying to influece the voting and now you have voted twice! --Hunter91 17:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment I would respectfully request that a) you refrain from calling people Sockpuppets and b) you carefully check the page before making such remarks I have voted ONCE. --Charlesknight 17:22, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment I do not know Charlesknight, but having worked with him on other articles, he seems an upright and honest user and if he does have sockpuppets, he would not use them here. Dev920


      • Comment How dare you accuse me of being a sock puppet! I'm now reporting you to an admin. I am fed up with this. Seriphyn 19:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
        • Comment Seriphyn is not a sock puppet of anyone. His editing style does not match any other user involved in this dispute; I can also vouch for him, as a disinterested user(check my contributions, by all means), as I know him offline and he does not have any sockpuppets. Dev920 20:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete This is not only not the name of the game, it is poorly written and the article already exists under the game's correct name. Dev920 20:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge if any non-duplicated content can be found, otherwise Redirect. According to WP:REDIRECT: Redirects are used to "aid searches on certain terms" and to "make the creation of duplicate articles less likely...by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term". Removing the content of the page isn't the same as deleting it. If you are voting to delete because you deel that Battlefield 2 is more appropriate, please consider the possibility of redirecting if you haven't already. Redirects are cheap and creating one at this title wouldn't be harmful per WP:REDIRECT. This is a possible search term so it should be kept per User:Pboyd04.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 21:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment Point; a redirect is suitable as 'Battle Field 2' is a possible search term, as said. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Seriphyn (talk • contribs) .
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.