Wikipedia:Speedy deletions

For articles that need deletion, add {{deletebecause|Reason.}} or {{db|Reason.}} to the top of the page. You should not wipe out the contents as it helps to check the contents to be deleted without having to look at the page history. This expands to:

Template loop detected: Template:Db-reason

Replace Reason with the reason why the page should be deleted under the speedy deletion criteria.

Other templates available that give a reason include {{nonsense}}, {{db-empty}}, {{db-band}} and {{db-bio}}. They may be used where appropriate. For a full list, see Speedy deletion templates.

(You can also use {{delete}} or {{d}} if you prefer not to provide a reason, but it is generally a good idea to provide a reason, even where it seems "obvious" to you.)

Note that if you just replace the content with {{db|reason}} the prior content will not be automatically added to the deletion log summary when the page is deleted.

See below for instructions regarding the deletion of personal subpages.

For articles that do not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, please use Wikipedia:Proposed deletion (for deletions likely to meet no opposition) or Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (for controversial deletions). Please do not list pages here that are already listed there.

• Review our admin deletion guidelines
• Use Category:Candidates for speedy deletion for a list of pages
• Check talk pages, page history, what links here (especially for potentially controversial user pages), etc. If there is a dispute over whether the page should be deleted, consider first listing it on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
• If the page to be deleted is directly related to a specific user or that user's activities, consider moving the page to that user's personal userspace (and deleting the redirect) instead of deleting it outright.
• Don't worry too much [1] — new pages patrol is unpleasant, and people will make mistakes. Wikipedia:Speedy deletion patrol goes through the deletion logs to catch stuff that shouldn't have been speedied, without rancor or excessive red tape. Feel free to be efficient!

Unless you are a sysop, it is not possible to delete your own user pages and subpages, so they must be listed here. If you are a sysop, it is recommended that you also list your pages here so they can be deleted by another sysop. For your main user or talk pages, you must list them here, not delete them yourself, to avoid the appearance that sysops can delete to hide negative comments, while others can't.

Only post pages from your own personal page, and only if you have a genuine reason for requesting a personal page of yours be deleted, please list it here.

Please see Wikipedia:User page for further instructions, and Wikipedia talk:Personal subpages to be deleted for past discussion on this issue.

Note: For faster response, please add {{deletebecause|Reason.}} or {{db|Reason.}} as mentioned above.

The page has a history, that's all the archive I need. - Andre Engels 13:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm not going to do this one. Seems like having stuff that we don't have to dig through page history for would be a good idea, given this edit. Wikibofh_(talk) 22:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Algore" is Rush Limbaugh's purile and derogatory nickname for the former vice-president, and should not have its own page, currently a simple redirect to Al Gore. There is no purpose for this page other than as a insult against the man. Kitteneatkitten 20:30, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Looks like a harmless typo redirect to me. But then I don't follow conservative talk radio. Dgies 20:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not a speedy candidate On further reconsideration, I think even if it is perjorative, we should keep it. Wikipedia:Redirects_for_deletion/Precedents suggests that insulting name redirects should be kept if they are widely known. Also, per policy on this very page (Wikipedia:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion#Redirects) this does not quality to be speedied. If you want to continue this, take it to RfD
    Dgies 02:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The nickname is not widely known. You didn't know about it, for example. Futhermore, what the entry is about is making it more widely known. Finally, the policy says they can still be speedily deleted if they are "obviously ridiculous." A redirect from Algore to Al Gore, based on the fact that talk radio host likes to call the man a purile nickname, is definately, in my book "obviously ridiculous." It is also not an "obvious misspelling" Al Goar might be an example, but that is not the case here. Kitteneatkitten 03:07, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a typo redirect. As an expression of contempt for him, Limbaugh always calls him Algore on the radio (saying the words together) and in print. Further, there is no typo redirect for Billclinton or Georgebush. Keeping this article basically means legitimizing a mean-spirited prank. Kitteneatkitten 01:10, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Its definitely perjorative, basically Bill Clinton's Igor. We don't need to be promoting Rush Limbaugh's slang for Democrats any more than we would promote Halliburton Shill or KKKarl Rove. But perhaps this should be listed at RFD. Thatcher131 01:42, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per noms own statements that it's a nickname used on a widely available radio show. Just because their neocons doesnt mean they shouldnt be able to get to Al Gore's article. Hell, it may help them learn a thing or two. My same reasoning on its mutual listing at the WP:RfD page -M^ask   03:58, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I made a mistake by trying to quickly add a new redirect page to Wikipedia by getting to the 'create a new article' page. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agdsfaf&redirect=no Delete this redirect page I made. Stuart mcmillen 03:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Both just redirect to User:Dvandersluis/Userboxes/Programming-interest, and as nothing refers to the redirects, there is really no need for them. I'd appreciate a delete, thanks! :) –Dvandersluis 02:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary subpage that now just redirects to my main sandbox, and I don't need the redirect. Deletion would be appreciated. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 18:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- Northenglish (talk) -- 20:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This username is the name of a real blood and flesh people in Mexico City that has not given its consent to be used here as the nickname of anyone. This may be potential vandalism or something very smelly. Please delete at once. You may confirm this at "octavio at fisica dot unam dot mx". Please google the name and verify that all points to the same guy who is a scientist: me!. Please, if posible delete also this entry when done. All the best.

Obvious dupe with List of file sharing programs, plus it does not compare anything! -- ClementSeveillac 13:34, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Attempted to get an edit counter that works. This one didn't work, probably due to the Internet Explorer rule. Please delete, thanks. --Tewy 20:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I originally created this for WikiProject Cats, but as they're on that project page now, I no longer need my own subpage for them, so please could I have it deleted? Thanks! :) Sergeant Snopake 12:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another Nonsense page, this time about a person who 'May or may not love horses'. J Milburn 01:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page has been changed to talk about a 'celebrity' who does not seem to exist. No google hits. Still a large, uncaptioned picture. The user has the same name as the article. Also, the tag has been removed twice without explanation by user:Kody monet.

AGAIN, the tag has been removed without explanation, even after I have left a note on the user's talk page. Could someone please delete the article and take action against the user? J Milburn 11:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same as page below, on a similar subject, presumably from the same author. J Milburn 00:33, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Has now been expanded. J Milburn 00:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made the page thinking I knew what I was doing. Not in favor in being kept due to not meeting WP:Corp guidelines, and I'm not going to try and improve it at this time. --Mike24 06:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable radio announcer. Nord 262 22:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable TV techincal person, unsourced for almost a year. Nord 262 22:24, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does not deserve to remain as a wikipedia article Kyros 07:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep now correctly named as Orville Brown establishes links and credibility

Please delete the article, Everett Station (Everett). I haven't seen any use for it in the encyclopedia, and it contains an extremely small amount of information Bobcheezy 22:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not speedy deletable by CSD criteria. Prod or AfD it if you wish. Kimchi.sg 13:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Garfield was an article that was deleted as a result of an AfD almost a year ago but has since been recreated. This article should be speedied. --Strothra 02:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why was it deleted then? Is this the same text? __meco 12:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Steve_Garfield article seems to have been deleted for lack of notability and autobiographical reasoning. I can't, of course, know what the original content was. Kevin_b_er 00:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The author recently "became a correspondent for the vlog Rocketboom," and is clearly very involved with vlogging and such. Maybe it's an important part of the user's community, but this guy isn't very notable. Mind flux 22:42, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It asserts some notability and thus isn't speedy deletable. AfD it again if you wish. Kimchi.sg 13:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep IMO, Seems notable. Rocketboom is viewed more than some basic cable channels. - Mike Beckham 15:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Classification: Housekeeping Reason: Pages are already covered by Ghost in the Shell (disambiguation) and these pages were made by User:Yyyyyyyyyyy as a sort of hierarchal disambiguation system.

• Ghost in the Shell (manga) (disambiguation)
• Ghost in the Shell (anime)
• Ghost in the Shell (anime film)
• Ghost in the Shell (TV anime)

--70.111.249.132 22:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Ghost ...(manga) (disambiguation)" deleted. Prod the other 3 if you want, but I don't think others will agree. Kimchi.sg 13:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the header of the other pages to speedy deletion and redirected outside links so there won’t be dead links when deletion takes place. --70.111.249.132 19:35, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is patent nonsense. Only by user:Mikemikev2000. Gang staEB• ice slides) 13:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've now replaced the nonsense with a little factual information, so I doubt it deserves to stay speedy. Emyr42 13:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What can I do to prevent the deletion of this page? what must i include? VNU Global Media Our article serves as an informational article regarding our company and what our company does. I've seen other corpoate pages and am trying to follow their same goal regarding their articles. Our significance is that we are a contributer in International Publications and use a variety of media tools to aid in marketing and research.

I've removed it from the speedy deletion queue as the article asserts the notability of its subject. However this article reads as a straight forward advertisement for VNU Global Media and as such I have proposed its deletion (see the new notice on the article). Its clearly written solely from the point of view of the company and Wikipedia is not an advertising medium. In general we do not accept "vanity" articles: ones written by interested parties such as yourself because they tend to end up as hagiographies of the subject. If VNU Global Media are notable enough to be covered by Wikipedia a third-party will come along and write a more balanced article about the company. Best, Gwernol 19:40, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I mistakenly created this invalid misspelling of Swatantrata Divas, India's Independence Day and sheepishly request its deletion!

• I've turned it into a redirect to the proper article, in case someone else makes the same mistake! Tyrenius 01:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the remains of a previous "merge" vote, butthe original was never deleted Fiddle Faddle 08:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taken from the International Thumb Wrestling Association discussion page.

This article has already been deleted once before, and a discussion if it appears on the user's talk page --NMChico24 02:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• The ITWA has become more notable than before (see links at bottom of article) and I intend to add more information within the next couple of days. Thank you for letting me voice my side of things. --Slyder Pilot^E@ 02:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • You wrote an encyclopedia article about this "association." If it's notable, why don't you include that info in the article, rather than just redirecting to some link? --NMChico24 02:25, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Because it's almost 10:30 and almost time for bed and I have a long day in front of me tomorrow with little time to edit until I get home from my 13 hour work/master's class day. Thanks for undersatnding and giving me some extra time. --Slyder Pilot^E@ 02:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a poorly-formatted list associated with the article for Conway, Arkansas, but providing no information that is not clearly available and presented in more detail in the pages on the External Links of that page. Turly-burly 13:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why delete it? It is an encyclopedia article about an insurance agency that I have a policy with. --Bennyp77 21:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

db-repost of previously deleted, deletion review verified, speedy deleted, speedy deleted again metadata template. Zzzzz 11:27, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, see Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_establishment#Good_Article_Symbol. That it was brought up before does not mean we can not bring it up again, esp since there is a lot of support for this and the GA policiy is now firmly established. There is no reason not to recognize editors for good articles. The symbol of a green star has lots of support or the cross sign of the GA project could be used.Rlevse 12:06, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now see WP:DRV for 8 July. Rlevse 13:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This template is useless, as seen on X.Org Server.--Chealer 20:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Templates are not speedy deletable unless they are divisive or inflammatory userboxes. Take it to templates for deletion instead. Kimchi.sg 13:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded to spam-proof my e-mail/MSN addresses and to test out SVG on my user page, but are now redundant (I now use CAPTCHA). These images are now orphaned and can be safely deleted. Andrew (My talk · World Cup) 22:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User uploaded a very smple graph for a patent nonsense article. Then tryed to pass it off as US Gov work. Gang staEB• ice slides) 13:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded for inclusion on the Hiwatt page, but decided against it. MightyMoose22 ^{>Abort, Retry, Fail?_} 02:55, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded from Commons for front page. No longer on front page. (Note: I couldn't tag the image because it is protected, so I tagged the talk page instead) --GW_Simulations_{|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail} 19:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Created by me but doesn't work. Also, it is not needed because it is a fair use image and should be low resolution. Mahahahaneapneap 20:58, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All used on either Big Brother (Australia series 6) or Big Brother (Australia series 5)

:Image:BB06-Anna.PNG,Image:Ashley (BBA).jpg,Image:Camilla (BBA).jpg,Image:BB06-Claire.PNG,Image:Danielle (BBA).jpg,Image:BB06-Darren.jpg,Image:David (BBA).jpg,Image:BB06-Dino.PNG,Image:BB06-Elise-3.JPG,Image:BB06-Gaelan-2.PNG,Image:Jade (BBA).jpg,Image:BB06-Jamie.PNG,Image:BB06-John.PNG,Image:BB06-Karen.PNG,Image:BB06-Katie.PNG,Image:BB06-Krystal.PNG,Image:BB06-Lauren.JPG,Image:BB06-Michael.PNG,Image:BB06-Perry.jpg,Image:BB06-Rob.PNG,Image:BB06-Tilli.PNG,Image:BB05-Tim-2.JPG,Image:BB05-Vesna.JPG,Image:BB05-Jade.JPG,Image:BB05-Christie.JPG,Image:BB05-Dave.JPG,Image:BB05-Dean.JPG,Image:BB05-Hotdogs.JPG,Image:BB05-Heath.JPG,Image:BB05-Glenn.JPG,Image:BB05-Geneva.JPG

All of these images appear to be using invalid licensing information and are Copyright violations. The fair use rationale is stated as for identification and critical commentary on the station ID or program and its contents but the use of the images is instead superseding the use of the original work since the images are being used to re-tell the story-line of the program rather than to offer a critical review. Ste4k 15:25, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I listed these in the incorrect place. I have relisted them according to instructions on the copyright problems page. Ste4k 04:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid fair-use claim. Photo does not appear in Visa website, it was photoshopped. Dionyseus 06:03, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only redirects that meet the Speedy deletion criteria for redirects should be listed here. If it doesn't qualify as a speedy, then follow the standard process for deleting redirects.

Stub templates now redirects to Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Stub types. I distinctly recall reading that cross-namespace redirects were considered A Bad Thing... Kickaha Ota 22:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has been agreed to move Brooks to Punk but Punk has more of a history so it can't be automatic. In addition to that when Phil Brooks gets moved to CM Punk can an admin move Phil Brooks (disambiguation) to Phil Brooks? --- Lid 21:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completed. Thank you. --- Lid 01:17, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to deleted page, as per SD criteria R1. -GW_Simulations_{|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail} 20:45, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Accp was created by my imperfect understanding of Wikipedia's capitalization search paradigm. ACCP is the correct article, and searches on "accp" will get where they need to go, so "Accp" is not needed. My bad. -- Epastore 20:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Will not be deleted, it is plausible that one types in "accp" and hits "Go", which is when this redirect comes in handy. Kimchi.sg 13:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Accidentally created whilst trying to edit page with similar name which already exists. --GW_Simulations_{|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail} 18:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks GW_Simulations_{|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail} 20:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant placeholder. Originally intended to be first content for a new section which changes automatically every month, however the section was not added to the portal on July 1st, so June section was useless. Then the section was converted to a placeholder to prevent a redlink should users who were still in June (due to timezones) visit the portal. Now this is also useless. --GW_Simulations_{|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail} 13:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what the policy is on talk pages for typo-redirects, but this one is only being used for graffiti right now, so I wanted to let everyone know in case it should be deleted. Lusanaherandraton 09:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CSD C1 - This category hasnt been used since, I believe, May 3rd. Its a category for a small book called the Kybalion. I see very little reason to keep it around, as nothing could be placed in this category besides the main article. Zos 14:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pure vandalism. Briememory 02:12, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I foolishly made the category with a capital "c" instead of lowercase. Please delete it speedily. Adso de Fimnu 19:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Category is patent nonsense. Buckner 1986 05:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as a non-notable band, but are in fact somewhat famous (especially in the L.A. area). They consistently sell out their thrice-weekly shows, and have been on the cover of All Access Magazine. I've added this info and citations to the page. This should be moved to AFD if there is any debate. -- -Matthew Cieplak ^{(talk) (edits)} 09:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After recieving speedy deletion notice, I have explained its importance in the discussion page and will show importance in main page upon the next edit.

The society was mentioned in the Galway Article and in the Druid Theatre Company Article.

The page is a vital source of information to many in the yorkshire area. The group is a big hit but with little or no information surrounding the group. Wikipedia will be central to those seeking knowledge of the D.t.G. thanks.

I've speedy deleted it (WP:CSD #A7) after reading the article and this comment. I'm afraid Wikipedia is not a forum for you to publicize your group of friends. Its an encyclopedia that reports on things that have already achieved a level of notability. Once your group has done something to make it notable, we'll welcome an article on it. There was no assertion of notability in the article. Also none of the claims were verifiable. Sorry, Gwernol 12:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete my article about the band Same Same. I believe they fit the guidelines for Notability for many reasons, but mainly because the band "Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable". Both members of Same Same were formally members of the band The Moffatts which easily meets several of the criteria for a notable band. I intend on adding more information to the article and believe it is enough information to warrant a second page instead of just a redirect to the Moffatts article. Albertane 02:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Podcast has a large following of over 10,000 downloads per each episode each week. Is part of the PodShow network, has consistent sponsors such as Eartlink, and has been on Sirius radio with more episodes likely to also air... on Sirius - Mike Beckham 14:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is an artists resource i've added as it was mentioned in many of their artists pages... The text is similar to that on their site explaining what they do, but not identical. It's a useful performance resource.

The Furious Four is a real musical group just like Run DMC or Sugar Hill Gang. It has a fan base, granted not as extensive as the aformentioned, but fans nonetheless. I have stated the history of the group, as well as intentions for the future. Also, external links/resources provided.

Don't delete this article! It is not merely external links. Some state's legal codes have internal links, such as General Laws of Massachusetts. For others, see Category:United States state legal codes. —Markles 23:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Most of the linked pages need to be created or greatly expanded, but I don't see anything wrong with this. Ace of Sevens 20:13, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about an internet character, there are several other articles up about such a thing. It can be expanded later, as more of his videos are released on the internet.

I have sourced this entry.

Please userfy my entry. I look forward to the day it will be considered notable, it wont be too long. ;-)

Please take it to AfD instead. He's one of the six worst sex offenders in Victoria, and one of the top ten in Australia. That's noteworthy, surely! - Richardcavell 23:35, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll fix it.

This is a old Vaishnava song in sanskrit. It has been described in original verses and translation. There is a list of songs that I intend to complete under the section Vaishnava Songs.

I went back to check the site and it was already deleted. Can it be restored please?

Redirect listed for speedy deletion as linking to nonexistent page. Page redirected to now exists. Listing here because I created the redirect myself so can't remove the template myself. Hornplease 05:30, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually deleted as I wrote the above. Whatever. Recreated. Hornplease 05:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After receiving a speedy deletion notice, I revised the "Rod Bernard" entry to indicate the subject's importance (now contained in the opening sentence). This should address the deletion notice's primary concern.

Please note that I intend this entry to serve as a "stub," since Wikipedia had a link for "Rod Bernard" but no actual entry for this subject. I plan to expand the entry periodically.

I have since revised and expanded the entry considerably since making the initial entry this morning.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Skb8721"

--Skb8721 18:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unverified material, no supporting documentation, severe POV problems. Tychocat 02:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

These are listed under CSD A6. A number of other articles that were in the same category have already been deleted, presumably for the same cause. These pages were not "created primarily to disparage its subject". They were created because I felt that Wikipedia ought to have articles about these agencies, which achieved notability through being listed in the list that the category was named after (available here). Note that the information quoted in them is verifiable under the meaning of WP:Verifiable, that article having been produced on behalf of a well-known and respected professional body in the field of publishing. I don't think the verifiable truth can be disparaging. Fortunately, I've been able to save the text of Barbara Bauer, which had been edited a number of times before it was deleted. Can somebody clarify whether that article (which had similar information, but more in-depth) could be recreated? JulesH 00:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see the articles have been deleted but the category remains and the request for deletion has been removed from it. What does this mean? Would recreating the articles be appropriate? If not, then it would probably be best to delete the category anyway, as there will clearly never be anything in it. JulesH 06:56, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adhocipedia Someone deleted it, believing it to be implicitly WP:NN, please note that it may be about an encyclopedia of NN, but it itself is not NN because the encyclopedia's existence may be more notable than its content. Also, yes it only has 2 articles, but the point of the article on Wikipedia was to attempt to rectify that situation.CMIIW 15:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So it was advertising? Anyway, though the fact that it's on non-notable subjects doesn't make it non-notable, it may be non-notable for other reasons (such as the fact that it has only 2 articles). --Ihope127 19:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This has been listed per CSD G5. I disagree that it qualifies under G5 as it was made by the banned user User:The Man's Plans on 7 April 2006 [2] before he was banned on 24 April 2006 [3]. I undertand CSD G5 qualifies if the page is made while a user is banned per WP:CSD -- Samir धर्म 04:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the only contributors to this article are the puppets of Prin. So, he is unavailable to cite any references or answer questions about this article. As to the article itself, the film is a masala entertainer. It is certainly not a classic to enter any encyclopaedia. Anwar 04:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The same reasoning holds for all of the following:

• Jayam
• List of popular Kollywood films
• Mallika Kapoor
• Ramesh Khanna
• Ramyakrishna
• Sadaf Mohammed Syed
• Sandhya
• South Filmfare Award for Best Actor (Tamil)

Not a commentary on their content. Just on the rationale for deletion. -- Samir धर्म 05:05, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know films had to be classics to enter encyclopaedias. Wikipedia aims to be the biggest encyclopaedia ever. That means that simply EVERYTHING should be on just in case someone wants information. What if someone was doing a Media Studies essay on Tamil Masala's?? Nobleeagle (Talk) 06:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notable enough, and valid material for WP.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 06:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm being bold and deleting the db's. I'll advise the nominator. -- Samir धर्म 07:39, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your actions. When you have already placed a hang on tag, there is no need for such innovations. Anwar 07:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure there is. They don't meet CSD. At all. -- Samir धर्म 07:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. If they are not CSDs then the tags should be removed. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 15:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are CSDs. This is a chart of bans of the proven puppets of the vandal Prin. I believe all articles created by his puppets after the first ban date (11 April) are eligible for speedy del under { db-ban }.

The following articles were created after 11 April by his puppets - Jayam, List_of_popular_Kollywood_films, Mallika_Kapoor, Ramesh_Khanna, Sadaf_Mohammed_Syed, Sandhya, South_Filmfare_Award_for_Best_Actor_(Tamil)

Anwar 21:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• You have confused the difference between a block and a ban, and as such, your argument does not hold. Please refer to Wikipedia:Banning policy and specifically to Wikipedia:Banning policy#Dealings with banned users. User:Prin was banned on 16 May 2006 [4], and as such, the articles created before then simply do not qualify for CSD. Bring up the content isses at WP:Afd -- Samir धर्म 00:42, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I put a hangon on one of these articles yesterday. It was a fairly solid article about a movie that looks to be notable (not sure), although it needs sourcing. I fail to see whether it matters or not if the user is banned, if the article itself is good. Put it up for AfD and see if anyone else is willing to modify the article to correct deficiencies, if any, that's my suggestion. ++Lar: t/c 04:44, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I've said before, if I were banned tomorrow, would India at the Cricket World Cup and Debaters Association Victoria and numerous other articles be simply deleted?? Nobleeagle (Talk) 07:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understood G5 to apply to articles created AFTER someone was banned, which presumably India at the Cricket World Cup (not that I care a whit about cricket, I mean really! Incomprehensible, silly game, let's rid WP of ALL cricket articles!. LOL... KIDDING! ) is not, having been written in the past prior to any theoretical ban. G5 however does seem to offer an escape clause in that an article authored by a banned user after the ban can nevertheless be taken under the wing of someone else (who then "assumes responsibility" for it as it were) if that person substantially edits it. The article I refer to I did not substantially edit but I did put a hangon tag on it. ++Lar: t/c 14:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guy is a performer and writer on X-play, a cult hit video game review/sketch show on G4tv. there are numerous links to him, on the x-play page, the x-play minor characters page, and the page for weezy and the swish, a podcast on which he's a frequent guest and guest host. i thought it'd be nice to have a short entry on him. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Guyball (talk • contribs) .

This is a biography relating to the life and work of Rob Hain and as such is an art stub. It will be added to in due course as more information becomes available. In the mean time other users are at liberty to make changes or to add to the content as they see fit. Rob Hain has illustrated books which are for sale through Amazon and is understandably eager to give any background information on his work which may lead to greater understanding.

If PopMatters and Tiny Mix Tapes can have pages, why not TwoWayMonologues? It updates more often than Tiny Mix Tapes, and is just as important. The website, which I do not run by the way, gets thousands of visitors every month, and thus should be allowed its own WikiPedia entry. - AlaskaFox 12:22, June 8 2006 (UTC)

This page should not be considered a vanity page. Greg Wain is a figurehead, headmaster, and currenlty holds a position of authority. He should be considered relevant. Note: for further information on Mr. Wain, Google 'Greg Wain'.

According to Wikipedia: "An article is "important" enough to be included in Wikipedia if any one of the following is true:

There is evidence that a reasonable number of people are, were or might be concurrently interested in the subject (eg. it is at least well-known in a community). It is an expansion (longer than a stub) upon an established subject. Discussion on the article's talk page establishes its importance.

If an article is "important" according to the above then there's no reason to delete it on the basis of it being: of insufficient importance, fame or relevance, or currently small or a stub, or obscure. (Detailed obscure topics hurt no-one because it's hard to find them by accident, and Wikipedia isn't paper.)"

Greg Wain is well known amongst the private school and Gold Coast community (this community exceeds 200,000 persons). This article is an expansion of the The Southport School 'wikipage', and hopefully the discussion here establishes his importance.

I look forward to any feedback.

Regards 144.133.216.231 12:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd suggest this become a paragraph in The Southport School. Searching for notability, the best I can find is this newspaper article [5], which points out that the Southport School is not performing well, despite being the most expensive school in Queensland. "TSS principal Greg Wain did not return The Courier-Mail's call." --John Nagle 23:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Not Speedy. Suggest AfD. The segment "Greg Wain along with John D. Mayer published a series of papers on young-male adult's emotional intelligence. These paper's were later distributed in early 2002 to 90% of all the Greater Public School's within Australia. The paper's showed the capacity to perceive and understand emotions define a new variable in personality." may, if developed, have sufficient claim to notability. I suggest this is moved to AfD to allow time for development, investigation or discussion. Those papers themselves are an attribute of Wain, not the school, so a merge would be inapproproate for that part of the topic Fiddle Faddle 16:51, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Hmmm. Seems to be already there. So it probabaly doesn't need to be here, then :) Fiddle Faddle 17:01, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Single by notable band. I'll be expanding this article tomorrow. Thanks, SaltyWater 21:16, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or, you could just go ahead an delete it. Brilliant. Thanks. SaltyWater 10:52, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While Mr. Ulwick does not have other articles by or about him on Wikipedia, this was an attempt to disseminate his business philosophy and that of his company, Strategyn. While interest in his company and practices may seem rather niche and therefore unworthy of inclusion, he is a trailblazer in market segmentation and the furthering of the Six Sigma standard. While this is, granted, a lot of area to cover, there is only so much that can be done in the initial article. However, there is indeed an audience of business professionals who want to know more about this author and speaker.69.28.160.194 23:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Suggest deletion per WP:VAIN. An attempt to disseminate his business philosophy and that of his company is called "advertising". --John Nagle 23:03, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I see. Then the Wikipedia listings for Microsoft and Nintendo, whose pages include descriptions of their yet-to-be released products, will be coming down soon as well, yes? 69.28.160.194 18:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Microsoft and Nintendo are both multi-national, multi-million dollar companies, both very notable... - Adolphus79 21:54, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is the bar for an encyclopedia that entries only cover subjects a reader might already know about? Or to supply answers for questions one might ask? To say descriptions of products fairly represents a company, as is true in the Microsoft and Nintendo examples, but that descriptions of a company's founder is a vanity piece is frankly quite odd. I use Wikipedia to find information on topics I do not know everything about already, not to look up information on common knowledge. Incidentally, I am not Mr. Ulwick. I am merely trying to supply information about him and his company. Wikipedia is replete with entries of other such notables and their companies. I have made great efforts to make this article mimic those in style and format.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mightyseo (talk • contribs)

• I agree with Nagle, notability has not been proven, and the author of this article has only written it, and the article for Mr. Ulwick's company (Strategyn)... I assume the author is Mr. Ulwick, in which case, this would make a fine user page... - Adolphus79 21:52, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many bands have pages on wikipedia. This page is in the process of being created so that information on the band would be more accesable. People are interested in this band and this is a place other that the bands home page where people can find out things. Many Evanescence fans are interested in covers and tributs done of evanescence's musicc and this band provides that. I do not believe it should be deleted. or it should atleast be given a chance to prove that it is worthy of Wikipedia.

ps. i wasn't sure where to wite this but i thibk i'm suposed to wite it here. please correct me if i'm wrong.

• Neutral. Seems marginal. TruthbringerToronto 03:18, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please dont this was real organization i dont think it should be deleted because it can teach others what will happen yeah it needs some editing but thats what were all here for (Googleyii 02:45, 12 June 2006 (UTC))[reply]

• Delete as NN TruthbringerToronto 03:18, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

no... stop... my baby... (Googleyii 03:09, 12 June 2006 (UTC))[reply]

• Delete as NN TruthbringerToronto 03:18, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I placed my rationale on the talk page, but in case it's not spotted I'll repeat here :

• Regular character on the flagship soap opera of one of the UK's terrestrial channels (the character had an article long before the actress did!)
• Lead character on BAFTA-winning childrens' sitcom.
• Was member of pop group (allSTARS) who had four top-twenty hits in the UK, including one at #9 (see everyhit.com and search for "allstars")
• Was considered famous enough by the producers of the long-running and popular Never Mind the Buzzcocks to be invited as a panelist.

If nothing else, I would suggest taking the article to AfD. I certainly don't feel it's a speedy candidate. Seb Patrick 11:17, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't think this article should be deleted. --Jonquière 01:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This page is 100% true and rooted in fact as anyone who has read Star Wars Tales 20 can attest to. I find it disrespectful that I and Clever curmudgeon would be written off as "tricksters" so easily after many exciting and useful contributions to wikipedia. If you check this page, I'm sure you will be able to see that the George R. Binks in question does appear in the issue and was including long before I created the article. I hope that the intrusive warnings that appear at the top of the articles page can be removed quickly and we can all put this behind us. Iodyne 18:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd suggest deletion per WP:FICT. This is a minor character in a minor non-canon comic which verges on fan fiction. This kind of stuff belongs in Wookiepedia. --John Nagle 22:58, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Do not bring your personal opinions and point of views to wikipedia. The article is based on a character that exists in the Star Wars universe, and thus, there is no reason an article should not be dedicated to George R Binks as there are hundreds of other articles dedicated to Star Wars characters. The sources are true and there is proof against the verifiability of these sources. clever curmudgeon 02:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Wikipedia policy (WP:FICT)is that "Non-notable minor characters (and places, concepts, etc.) in a work of fiction should be merged with short descriptions into a "List of characters." --John Nagle 03:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  That's great, but that's your opinion that George R. Binks is a non-notable minor character. To others, he is a very prominent character that appears in Star Wars media. Clearly, there is enough information on George R. Binks to create a detailed article about him, and thus, the article should be left as it is. Bromyne 19:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Resolution: Article went to AfD and was deleted via that process. --John Nagle 06:27, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I knew I was restoring a deleted page, so I was very careful in my work and in placing notice on the talk page, so I am dissappointed the article was still flagged.

As I said on my page... this is part of my continuing project to write about the notable performers in Arizona.

This was a vanity article, deleted in May 2006. I have re-created the article with links and an objective POV. There are no set Wikipedia guidelines for notability for improv groups, as there are for bands and musicians, but JRC is a notable figure (yes, that is his legal name) in both Arizona improv and music, as is Ryan Avery (though there are not Wikipedia articles about them at the time I'm writing this, there will be soon).

Because the vanity article was under the search phrase "catorce improv," and that still comes up in the search engine, I have re-directed that phrase to this page.

I have invited those who nominated the original article for deletion, or voted on the nomination, to go to the Catorce:Talk page with any comments! Parsssseltongue 00:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've only been working on this article for two hours. I don't know what to say, except give me a chance.Tallahassee 03:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just added to the Talk page associated with my Hearty White page the fact that the main newspaper, the Tallahassee Democrat, has done several articles mentioning Hearty White; however, they're now archived for paying subscribers. But they exist. And I didn't want that to go unnoticed, now that the Talk page may be "speedy deleted" simply because the Hearty White article was. Tallahassee 13:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is this about Hearty White or Tallahassee? · rodii · 15:49, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've only just created this article, and it has already been flagged. The page is under construction, so of course there isn't much there yet, but it'll grow. The page was proposed on the Kremling talk page and I really can't see how it fits the speedy deletion criteria. I've been working on it for about 10 minutes. As Tallahassee said above, please just "give me a chance"! All I can say is that there must be some pretty over-enthusiastic editors out there! RobbieG 12:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it's a tough action to speedy this. Paradoxically, I would however argue that it should be renamed, as the subject is from the sport of American football, rather than football (a.k.a. "Association Football) --Dweller 15:50, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made the article and will be expanding it shortly; he passes the Wiki test for notability, however. WillC 15:55, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion. It is verifiable, and is as notable as the song I Used to Work in Chicago, which also has its own page.

Right now we have:

1. Balls of steel - vocabulary term
2. Balls of Steel - tv show
3. Balls of Steel (TV) - redirect to Balls of Steel (tv show)

I propose moving 2 to 3 so that searching on "Balls of steel" with any capitalization combination leads to the same article (vocabulary term), which will have a link to the tv show article. In order to do this, Balls of Steel (TV) first needs to be deleted. MamaGeek (Talk/Contrib) 12:15, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Being a major editor to that article, I can confirm that this idea would be suitable. J.J.Sagnella 15:28, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been attacked almost since inception. One of the principle and open demonisers, User:Homeontherange, has already nominated it for deletion twice. Failing, he has now seriously defamed the subject which will undoubtedly cause unnecessary harm. Over 60 different editors compiled the original article with well-sourced commentary. This has now been massively butchered to such an extent that the article is now largely meaningless - except for the demonising element. I see proposals to include further smears from newspaper articles. It would be best for everyone concerned if this now very sad article was deleted. Sussexman 16:04, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a decent article to me, now that JzG has removed the botched AfD notice, and the subject is clearly notable. It sounds to me like you want to delete the article because it's not article you want, but losing an edit war does give you grounds for speedy deletion. You could try AfD again, but my guess is that the article is going to be kept. · rodii · 17:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. At first, when I saw this, it looked like total NN and Vanity and I was ready to just pass on. But I saw the subject of the article is a member of India's Lok Sabha. Being a member of the national legistlative body is, I think, inherently notable, even more so in a country of over 1 billion people. In addition, he served in the Legislative Assembly of a state with 160 million people. I purged most of the resumé and vanity portions, but it still needs some clean up. Interlingua ^talk 23:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At first I made it a vanity as I am a newb user as I forgot to read the tutorial and guidelines.I have just read those and have now changed it to a more fair page.Short right now yes but I can fix that.I have changed it according to the guidelines.Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DogPHman (talk • contribs)

• This article has previously been deleted four times, including a full AfD vote. --John Nagle 05:08, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I created this article yesterday after hearing about the Earth sandwich in a video on the NY Times's website. Today I checked and the article was gone! (I've since re-created it.) Perhaps the guy who removed it should be told to take it easy on the delete button?--Plainsong 19:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can expand on this page tomorrow.

• I explained this on your talk page. You cannot create a one sentence article with an infobox and assume it will stick around. This article violates both A3 and A7 of WP:CSD as a one sentence article about a month old webcomic. Staxringold _talk^contribs 02:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The band has released an album and have been recognised in the press with an entire article just about them. They are therefore significant enough to warrant an article. Please remove this article from proposed speedy deletion. Madder 21:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Local newspapers are often kind to local bands. Releasing an album doesn't confer notability either. Very few Google hits. Non-notable band. Dipics 21:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you could please delete this article, im the author. I wish to rewrite this article with a different name. I hadnt practiced moving well enough and its all screwed up now. I wont take it personally, i actaully want you to delete this so i can make a fresh page with the right title. Thanks. --Zhukov 02:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cannot understand why the link has sent me here. I am opposing the deletion of Dr Mark Mayall's article page. He was Chairman of the Conservative Monday Club when it was the leading non-party UK Conservative Pressure Group. He is also a leading paediatrician and child psychiatrist in England as can easily be gleaned from the Medical Register. 81.131.24.254 18:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete this page, I've discussed why in its talk page of the article

Which I have deleted, since the article has been deleted three times now (I think it is). Individual posters on internet forums rarely meet our notability criteria. User:Zoe|^(talk) 01:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This entry is not notable as I have established. Therefore, this article does not to be here. --Slyder Pilot^E@ 02:33, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone tought it would be fun to make a quick scrap on Paint mixing a pikachu and a poring, and then creating an article about it. Pure vandalism and nonsense. Please delete it Raquel Sama 22:46, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blatant advertising David Humphreys 02:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it could be rewritten with less POV? --Draicone 02:38, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the BRANDON HALL wikipedia page should stay.

i know that this may seem like a candidate for deletion, but i highly disagree. Brandon may not be of significant importance to most people YET, but all of this information is true. It isnt just a friend makinga wikipedia page as a gift or joke. This is an honest fan who actually owns his CDs and has seen his show. Even if he only has local sucess so far, he is arising star. And he has accomplished quite a lot, especially with his web site. This article whould stay, because it is an example of how future celebrities will become famous. With technology, creators of small shows can spreadtheir product, and quickly grow a large fanbase. It would be a shame ot delete thsi article, because it is NOT deserving of immediate dismissal. A fan is trying give their idol recognition, nd wikipedia is a way for them to do that. the page may not be very well created, but i am new to wikipedaia, and need help editing it and making it better. I ahope to learn so i may add photos and more links. This article SHOULD STAY. thank you for your time.

Obviously a vandalism article. --WillMak050389 20:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It stems off of the Nightly.Net message board and is the most infamous game. It is still being worked on as we have records, stats, and other tidbits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SportsJeopardy (talk • contribs)

This page already has several pages linking to it. It is a real school and is noteworthy. External links are provided. Srose 15:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I left a message on the talk page when I recreated the article noting the previous deletion. Only two people responded to the original afd so I do not know how strong a consensus that is. This person could be someone who makes false or exaggerated claims so I believe he is notable in that regard. Someone like that should have an accurate description in case someone wants to research this person. MrMurph101 20:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This page contains biographical information on a person, although a teenager, who is, and has had his name credited to 3 musical albums thus far. Also, the CSM Guitar Club will have its page created, and as the opening act to many popular bands has recording dates set up for the future, worthy of staying on wikipedia. They will undoubtidly sell many albums. Also associated with the Nanjamoy Creek Boys, a popular band in Maryland. Also, will undoubtidly be a college or pro lacrosse player in the future, so it saves future writers time.

Tagged for Speedy as an attack page by an anon. Clearly there are POV issues with the article (which I'd never looked at before today) but POV is not the same as a blatant attack page, and if anyone wants to argue for its deletion, IMO, it needs to go to AfD. Fan1967 00:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Image talk:Abel.JPG. There are several other sports-related images that have a CSD I7 tag on them; I don't have enough experience with Wikipedia images to know if they should be allowed, but I don't think that I7 is necessarily the applicable way to get rid of them if they don't belong. Ardric47 04:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We feel this article has merit because the Cheers and Gears website is one of the few GM-specific enthusiast websites on the internet, the site has been mentioned in several other internet automotive news publications, has broken a few notable GM-related stories, and is the home to a member (Chris Pawels) whose sketch of the next-generation (2009) Chevrolet Camaro concept was publicized in magazines worldwide. Thank you. The page will be enhanced/updated within the next day or two to reflect this as time permits.

The bootnr page hasn't been fully completed yet. When it is complete it will include all the relevant information that any person searching wikipedia for boot finding resources will need.

Though this page was re-created after a deletion, it was done so to correctly conform to neutrality voice requirements and contains only matters of fact. Additionally, it is planned to be continued in that neutral voice.

Speedy delete. If articles can be recreated the day after an AfD deletion vote it makes a mockery of the process. Meanwhile, the candidate continues to garner free publicity. As has been stated on a number of occaisions, WP is not involved in the political process and does not attempt to balance the number of articles based on an erroneous concept of neutrality. If this article is not speedy deleted it will simply encourage creators to keep bringing articles back until they get the result they desire. This should be Speedy deleted and protected against recreation. If Busansky gets elected then a new article can be prepared. BlueValour 01:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DO NOT DELETE. BlueValour, why have you taken it largely upon yourself to police this article and others that are similar? Are we going to delete all articles from political candidates? The FL9 US House race is one of the most wathced races in the country this year. If you and your fellow admins take down the Busansky site, then you better take down that of her opponent and all other US House candidate sites, including those of incumbents, while you are at it. If WP is not invloved in the political process, then why are there so many articles on the political process worldwide on WP? If this article gets deleted, you better delete that of the GOP candidate also. If not, I will appeal to higher up admins and make a case that you are violating the very rules that as an admin you are supposed to enforce. I am wondering if you are a legit admin or a vandal disguised as one.

Speedy Delete Inappropriate recreation of previously deleted article. Please use WP:DRV if you want it to come back after a deletion and outline your arguments there. -M^ask   03:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - 65.35.15.134, the source of the unsigned comments above, blanked the Speedy Delete notice on the Phyllis Busansky article, which I have now reverted. BlueValour 03:47, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want you to delete the article because it shows something of an e-fed history, if you delete this, you're deleting something that is in an e-fed history, than ks for reading. Mannytime 01:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

e-feds are not notable. It's already agreed they shouldn't have their own articles, and who cares how long someone held a fictional title? TJ Spyke 02:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Articles for deletion
• Deletion review
• Speedy deletion patrol