Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2005 January 12

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 January 12 1.1 Gawronska 1.2 Jerrell Schivers 2 Castle Square 2.1 Capitalist Money Madness 2.2 Capital Scholar 2.3 Samahan ng mga Mag-aaral sa Sikolohiya 2.4 Seph'd 2.5 Poker tournament strategy 2.6 Santa Claus Lane 2.7 How Blue Joined the Team 2.8 Seheult 2.9 Stalybridge Station Buffet Bar 3 Timetable info 3.1 Taciturn 3.2 The Roadrunners 3.3 Chupaqueso 3.4 York Road 3.5 Curious Chinese customs 3.6 July rising 3.7 Boris Johnson 3.8 Xentrix 3.9 Soundwin Network Inc. 3.10 Daniel Tingstrom 3.11 Space Shuttle Phoenix 3.12 Mazda Celtus 3.13 Stibo Catalog 3.14 Best rated theme parks in the UK 4 Sources 4.1 Ban Currency Circulation 4.2 Inside Moves 4.3 Bigelow-Rice Hall, Wesleyan, Edgar Hall, Wesleyan, Sturges Hall, Wesleyan, University Hall, Wesleyan, Elliott Hall, Wesleyan, Slocum Hall, Wesleyan, Conrades•Wetherell Science Center, Wesleyan Phillips Hall, Wesleyan 5 Heaven's Gate reference 6 Special K 7 Robert Ludlum 7.1 Henrik Aas 7.2 The Trolliban 7.3 WikidPad 7.4 The Ivy Club 7.5 Adam Jung 7.6 Robert Marshall 7.7 Robbie humphreys 7.8 Discrimination against non-Muslims in Iran 7.9 Bram Crevits 7.10 Russian (usage) 7.11 Greek (spelling) 7.12 Tips on how to be romantic 7.13 TrAcNet 7.14 Trac

[edit] January 12

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Hale Bopp comet controversy caused from the Art Bell show from VfD:

This page was created by an anon contributor and filled out only with the word 'faggot'. This is not an encyclopaedia article and, thus, should be deleted. --Neigel von Teighen 22:09, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Odd -- I could swear I remember having read an article about the Babylonian boundary stones of the same name somewhere here. It doesn't show up in the article history, though, so I guess it should be deleted. --Ben 22:14, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete due to CSD: vandalism (#3). --Deathphoenix 01:50, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete ASAP, vandalism. Wyss 03:56, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

---

Votes since vandalism was replaced with real article.

• As Ben noted, these were engraved stones created by the Kassites in Mesopotamia to record land grants and land boundaries. They are the only remaining artworks from their period in charge of Babylonia from the 16th Century BC to the 12th Century BC and examples are in the Louvre and the National Museum of Iraq. Encyclopedia Britannica has an article on kudurru and I have created an authentic article for Wikipedia to replace the vandalism which was rightly speedy deleted. Keep the rewritten article.Capitalistroadster 09:39, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Since the article is no longer vandalism it was initially reported for, I will remove the notice and ask for this listing to be ignored. Mgm|^(talk) 10:44, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep re-written article. ----MPerel^{( talk | contrib)} 07:44, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as rewritten. Edeans 16:18, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as rewritten Ben 17:33, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as rewritten — mark ✎ 19:08, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion from VfD:

Looks like an ad for an unimportant newsletter. JoaoRicardo 06:52, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The second largest community newspaper in Denver? Features columns by the Colorado Legislature's Speaker of the House? — 63.231.76.239 (Attribution added from history Uncle G 01:59, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC))

• Yes. Uncle G 01:59, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)

• With the advertising removed, it is a somewhat thin article. Uncle G 01:59, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
• Delete, the article as it stands doesnt have much, borderline notability. Megan1967 03:35, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, ad for another local Denver newspaper, not much for an article. Wyss 06:42, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• An author in a publication 5000 circ meets the Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion of biographies. A weekly newspaper itself in Denver with readership of 15000 doesn't? Keep; expandible. Samaritan 10:13, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Article can certainly be expanded. And I agree with Samaritan's reasoning. Keep. 131.211.210.157 10:53, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Another obvious keep. --Centauri 13:46, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 03:18, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep it. —RaD Man (talk) 23:23, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion

[edit] Gawronska

Looks like vanity. JoaoRicardo 06:08, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, not notable, geneaology, possible vanity. Megan1967 03:34, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as genealogy with a bit of foreign dicdef, (could also be vanity). Wyss 06:41, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete not notable, geneaology. Article also fails to note that "Gawronska" is the female form of the surname (the male equivalent is "Gawronski") :-). --Deathphoenix 06:51, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jerrell Schivers

Looks like vanity. JoaoRicardo 07:18, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Cdc 01:05, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as user test. Wyss 06:40, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete vanity more appropriate for a user page. --Deathphoenix 06:54, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Vanity page. ----MPerel^{( talk | contrib)} 07:46, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)

from VfD:

The basis for placing this on speedy deletion appeared to be that the city was unnamed: which is why "what links here" was invented, revealing that it is in fact Sheffield, UK. I think a decision needs to be made on whether this is notable enough for an encyclopedia i.e. whether it's made up or whether it needs clean up. -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 00:46, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Merge into something regarding Sheffield. --JuntungWu 01:54, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Actually Sheffield has had a dangling hyperlink, pointing to this, for some time. Uncle G 02:11, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)

• Delete, not notable. Megan1967 03:33, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Merge with Sheffield anyway, then Delete, it'll grow there. Wyss 06:38, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• I suspect that it grew out of the dangling hyperlink in Sheffield in the first place. Sheffield has a lot of links to separate articles for its landmarks, a lot of which have been written. If you are going to merge The "Hole in the Road", then you'll have to merge all of them as well, otherwise you'll make things terribly lop-sided. Such a merger will be a lot of work. I don't think that you'll get it done. Uncle G 13:30, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)

• Merge and don't redirect. If it's included there, it'll have a better chance of being expanded, if that's at all possible. 131.211.210.157 10:56, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• It is a major landmark in Sheffield (although not unique to Sheffield), and so does merit an mention in wikipedia. merge into Sheffield landmarks, a meta article with the details of the minor ones and summaries of the ones with large articles. Thryduulf 22:41, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Merge, no redirect necessary. RadicalSubversiv E 01:03, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion

[edit] Castle Square

I looked at merging this into the Sheffield article but there didn't seem to be a suitable place for it to go. Instead I have created a new article: Castle_Square,_Sheffield, which is the official name for this area. I have made a more complete history of theis square and included the details of its time as "The Hole in the Road".

[edit] Capitalist Money Madness

It may well describe a real phenomenon, but this is a neologism. Cdc 00:29, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, neologism. Megan1967 03:32, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, article provides no evidence of widespread use for this PoV political slogan. Wyss 06:37, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. POV neologism. jni 08:59, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Carrp 14:02, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. This is a very real phenomena that requires a phrase to encapsulate it and facilitate discussion etc. Because it is disparaging of capitalism, there will obviously be supporters of this socio-economic system that do not wish to have such a critically descriptive phrase in existence, and will therefore want it deleted. For an example of Capitalist Money Madness being used and discussed, see the talk forums of the Guardian newspaper http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?13@73.jmPzaPcVplW^0@.461 -- Anonymous post by 195.92.67.67
• Delete. Google only shows about 17 instances of this, all at www.blackchat.co.uk, and Wikipedia already has articles which contain criticisms of capitalism (or it should). Even if the world "requires a phrase to encapsulate it and facilitate discussion", it's not an encyclopedia's job to spread usage of a phrase just because it would help to facilitate discussion. Or at least, it's not Wikipedia's job to do such. -- Khym Chanur 07:18, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)
• Del, & kudos to User:Khym Chanur for a concise & valuable explication of one more thing WP is not. --Jerzy(t) 02:40, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)
• Delete. Neologism. --MPerel^{( talk | contrib)} 07:50, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Reads like a bit of promotion for the next Michael Moore project.  :-) Although I happen to like Moore (and The Guardian, for that matter), I agree this has no real place on WP. Edeans 16:59, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, for above reasons. — mark ✎ 19:06, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. The myriad examples of suffering, deprivation, disaster, chaos, violence, death and destruction due to capitalism's pursuit of profits, savings and cost cutting does indeed need a brief phrase to describe and sum this all up, and Capitalist Money Madness does just that. mlh2390 There is no user mlh2390; this message was by anonymous user 195.92.67.66; this IP is very similar to the IP for the only other "Keep" vote

[edit] Capital Scholar

A specific, not-unique program at a specific university. I'd consider a redirect, but the name is lousy too. Cdc 00:27, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as campuscruft, but Merge content to main article if possible. Wyss 06:34, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable. jni 09:02, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

from VfD:

Looks like vanity. JoaoRicardo 21:47, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. 6,160 Google hits. It's not a lot, but it's significant. LockeShocke 21:54, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. In spite of the already-low Google results, Johnathan Bishop is a relatively common name. I don't think any of the results on the first page were the guy this article is talking about. - Vague | Rant 07:46, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. He might not be as well known as Hans Asperger or Simon Baron-Cohen but he's done alot to advance technology for people with Aspergers. WelshAspie 21:00, Jan 10, 2005 (GMT)
  • • User's first edit. — Asbestos | Talk 10:57, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • I've edited a few VfD pages - it seems to me that anyone who does something to help people with autism or Aspergers doesn't deserve to be on Wikipedia in the eyes of many Wikipedians WelshAspie 10:07, Jan 14, 2005 (GMT)
• Delete; non-notable. Psychonaut 01:26, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, notable, passes Google Test. Megan1967 03:31, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, nn (it's a very common name btw). Wyss 06:33, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable (at least, this particular Jonathan Bishop is nn). --Deathphoenix 06:56, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Tentative delete - perhaps an article explaining his any notable features PARLE System would help to clear up his (apparent possible?) notability in the field. Samaritan 10:44, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC) (then Samaritan 11:33, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC))
• Delete. The PARLE system is non-notable (63 Google hits, many of which are about something else), the first article cited is found on Google Scholar but not cited by anyone (evidence of non-notability) and the other two can only be found on his website (noone else references them). Seems too nn for an article. His homepage, btw, is at [1] — Asbestos | Talk 10:54, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Carrp 14:02, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Doesn't 'pass the google test' as he has a fairly common name, and only two of the top 30 hits for that name are his (and that probably as he owns the domain name). Doesn't pass the academic test either, as there is no evidence of a permanent position or a notable publication record (Google Scholar and ISI Web of Knowledge do not give any indication that any paper he has published has been cited to date, which indicates non-notability in that sphere). What you can find is 235 hits for 'Jonathan Bishop Glamorgan', including a press release. Which, having read, I now feel that the PARLE system may just about deserve an article if it continues to be developed, but that doesn't mean the researcher who led the initial study does (and since they gave it to an MSc student, it suggests it was a very initial study). So Delete. Average Earthman 17:19, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. "Jonathan Bishop" "Asperger's" gets 2 hits. "Jonathan Bishop" Asperger gets 4 hits, including THIS page but, surprisingly, not the main article page. RickK 00:06, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Borderline keep; despite only a tiny number of Google results for "Jonathan Bishop" education and "Jonathan Bishop" "e-learning", his PARLE invention has made it into The New Statesman, and may be significant enough. Stombs 05:14, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • Did he actually invent it, or was he given it to work on as his masters project by a professor who came up with the idea? Average Earthman 21:33, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • Considering that he was a grad student, I would think it was probably assigned to him. RickK 22:40, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
      • If it was assigned to him how come it doesn't have his professor's name on his peer-reviewed journal paper and how come all the media attention has gone to him and not his professor? WelshAspie 10:07, Jan 14, 2005 (GMT)
        • Considering Jonathan Bishop is Welsh, and works on Aspergers, I wonder if the name "WelshAspie" isn't a bit too much of a give-away for you to be refering to him in the third person. — Asbestos | Talk 10:40, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
          • I don't particularly care who is listed as first author of apparently uncited papers. It doesn't suggest notability either way. Average Earthman 21:40, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keeplooks notable enough.--Silverback 03:07, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete --Christiaan 9:26, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - Like Tom Watson and Stuart Bruce he's well known in the Labour Party for his blog, which got shortlisted for the New Statesman New Media Awards in the same category as Tom Watson. Britain is Wikifying, don't let the Tories wreck it again --Politicool^± 18:15, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Where is this blog, and why doesn't is show up in the Google search I did? Are you sure it's the same person? RickK 21:15, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
    • If you do a search for "Jonathan Bishop" blog you'll find lots of pages linking to his blog, which is here as well as on his Wikipedia entry if you look WelshAspie 22:37, Jan 15, 2005 (GMT)
      • That gives me 35 hits, which isn't impressive. My name (in quotes) and blog gives me 80 hits, which shows how inaccurate this sort of search is seeing as I don't have a blog. Average Earthman 14:35, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - Could do with a little bit of expansion but worth keeping. Thryduulf 19:24, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Borderline delete, especially given suspicions of vanity. RadicalSubversiv E 01:05, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, notable Cardydwen 14:50, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion from VfD:

Looks like an ad for an unimportant newspaper. JoaoRicardo 06:54, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, not notable, advertisement. Megan1967 03:30, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, article doesn't provide evidence of notability. More history and less ad copy might have done it, but for now it's unhelpful. Wyss 06:31, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. How isn't a weekly community newspaper in English with tens of thousands in readership notable? Samaritan 10:15, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Needs wikifying, cleanup. --JuntungWu 12:56, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Obvious notability. --Centauri 13:36, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - no valid reason to delete - David Gerard 19:55, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep it. —RaD Man (talk) 23:24, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion

[edit] Seph'd

A dicdef neologism. Gets 492 hits on Google, and Google searches for "Seph D", and not Seph'd. So I'd assume that upwards of 80% of those hits are not "seph'd", but "Seph D" of some kind. For a word that originated online, you'd expect it to have more online hits. PMC 00:50, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• ADDED INFO: Seph'd isn't technically an online word. It's a slang term used in as many as two forums. Plus, Google reports the originating site back as the first two hits when searching for it. --LiQuiDpLasMaFloW --comment by User:68.3.176.239, creator of the Seph'd article
  • "Google reports the originating site back..." Er...so? PMC 01:50, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, slang terms used in "as many as two forums" are not encyclopedia material. --Stormie 01:02, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Agree. Andrewa 01:31, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Cdc 01:46, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Leave. Hmm... let's see here: now it's on Wikipedia, so MAYBE, just MAYBE more people will see it, and use it (at which point it DOES become encyclopedia material). Think about it, folks. --68.3.176.239 03:20, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: No MAYBEs about it, you're quite right, Wikipedia is an excellent place to promote neologisms such as this, and also to promote websites, unsigned bands, lots of things, so much so that if we allowed such promotions we'd have little time or bandwidth for anything else. Which is one reason we leave this to other sites, and explicitly ban it here. No change of vote. Andrewa 03:42, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Hi, cart before horse, delete. - Keith D. Tyler [flame] 21:53, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete nonencyclopaedic. Xtra 05:45, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as obscure jargon/slang net dicdef. Wyss 06:28, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete obscure slang defenition. nn. Mgm|^(talk) 11:04, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable. It looks to be used in only one (or maybe two) forums. --Deathphoenix 14:38, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Poker tournament strategy

It's an article with poker tips, not an encyclopedia article. JoaoRicardo 06:50, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Merge useful content to Poker and redirect. --L33tminion | (talk) 01:12, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Copyvio, unless the submitter User:Rbraddy is also the "Rick Braddy" who authored this article. Maybe something can be written and added to Poker strategy. -- Netoholic @ 01:48, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
• Delete if it's copyvio, Delete if it's not. While it's likely Rbraddy is Rick Braddy, this essay is original research. --Deathphoenix 14:45, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] How Blue Joined the Team

Refers to a none-existing film, seems to be nonesense.Notjim 01:00, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Patently absurd supposed Pokemon episode guide that claims Emma Watson to be a member of the cast. I don't know why I wasted time even checking at IMDB that she has had nothing whatever to do with Pokemon. Gibberish hoax. Speedy Delete. Uncle G 01:37, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete as silly vandalism. Wyss 06:26, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete as vandalism under CSD. The all-caps text to describe the girl's screaming adds weight to this vote. --Deathphoenix 14:49, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Seheult

There is no sign of relevance for this topic. Searches in Google didn't yeld significant results and there's no mention of these people in other parts of Wikipedia. JoaoRicardo 04:00, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Comment: It smells suspiciously like a machine translation. The copyright status of the original article may be important. Uncle G 01:19, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
• Delete, this content has been up for VfD before, rather recently, I think. Not encyclopedic to architecture, otherwise genealogical. Wyss 06:25, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Possible copyvio [2], or posted by author Roger Seheult himself which might classify it as vanity. Alarm 19:23, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

from VfD:

Reasons for deletion request (as of Deletion Policy):

• This article presents no kind of use
• Incomplete
• Not Comprehensive, and Lengthy enough

— Vlad Cletus via Uncle G 01:02, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)

• This is pure advertising. Delete. --L33tminion | (talk) 01:09, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Not necessarily pure advertising. Anyway, redirect to Ugg boots. -- Hoary 03:45, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
• Delete, retail ad. Wyss 06:23, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect and merge with Ugg boots. Cookiecaper 06:24, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Carrp 14:01, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect and merge any useful NPOV information to Ugg boots. The image (and the way it's formatted) leads me to believe that it's a copyvio, and needs to be deleted as well. --Deathphoenix 14:53, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to ugg boots. Stombs 05:16, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Ugg boots. Megan1967 01:17, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Spam. Delete and redirect to Ugg boots. - Mike Rosoft 19:00, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect and merge any useful NPOV information to Ugg boots. Alarm 19:27, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I have change the article into a redirect. The former content can be found at [3]. - Mike Rosoft 17:24, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion from VfD:

An article about a small ice cream store in a small town. Even if the owner of the place went to found a big company later, would people come to Wikipedia to look "Sherb Noble" up? JoaoRicardo 04:08, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, not notable. Megan1967 03:25, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Merge with Dairy Queen and Delete. Wyss 06:22, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Merge useful content with Dairy Queen. --Deathphoenix 15:02, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Dairy Queen. Alarm 19:37, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion

[edit] Stalybridge Station Buffet Bar

Apparently this once removed article has been recreated. I proposed the deletion without knowing this, and don't how to proceed from here. Anyway, what was said below about the former article still aplies. JoaoRicardo 05:47, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete according to CSD: Reposted content that was deleted according to Wikipedia deletion policy, although I don't know exactly what the deleted content was, I assume this applies to articles as well. This article looks to be less of an ad than described in the previous VfD below, but the fact is, this is a non-notable bar. There are several "locally notable" bars that I went to in my old university days, and I don't see those mentioned here. --Deathphoenix 15:01, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy deleted per CSD case 5. Content was word-for-word identical to the first paragraph of the previously deleted version. Comment: I suspect that it was recreated because whoever closed the discussion before forgot to check "what links here" and delete the link on Stalybridge. Rossami (talk) 22:47, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • Ok, learned the lesson. Sorry for the mess. JoaoRicardo 03:10, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

---

Stalybridge Station Buffet Bar 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

Advertisement for non-notable bar. RickK 19:33, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)

• I'm sure it is perfectly lovely, but this is still blatant advertising. Delete. Fire Star 19:45, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete, but I want a beer first. Antandrus 19:51, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Or, remove the peacock words, promotional language, and POV—and then move to Stalybridge Railway Station, because once you do that, what you are left with is a stub about the station:

Stalybridge Railway Station is located on the main line between Manchester and Huddersfield, about eight miles east of Manchester. It is close to the Peak District National Park. It is notable for having a CAMRA-recommended bar on Platform 1. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 20:29, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• Delete. Being CAMRA-recommended just means they brew their own beer and don't pasteurize it. Non-notable pub. — Gwalla | Talk 21:49, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Ah. Then if we remove that, too, the article becomes:

Stalybridge Railway Station is located on the main line between Manchester and Huddersfield, about eight miles east of Manchester. It is close to the Peak District National Park. It has a bar on Platform 1. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 22:24, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• Delete. Probably best to remove the bit about the bar on platform 1 as well! -- Necrothesp 00:53, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Very good. Perhaps the article should be:

Peak District National Park is served by Stalybridge Railway Station is located on the main line between Manchester and Huddersfield, about eight miles east of Manchester. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 22:31, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• Might transwiki to WikiTravel. -- Jmabel 07:36, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete: 100% pure advertising. Luigi30 19:23, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete, Agree with Luigi30Jongarrettuk 22:28, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Notable bar. anthony (see warning) 13:01, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Probably a really cosy bar and a great ale, between one cancelled train and another. But an encyclopaedic article it isn't. Dieter Simon 22:52, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Delete Fun article, but not encyclopedic --ScottyBoy900Q∞ 18:28, 04 Oct 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. from VfD:

What is the relevance of a railway station? JoaoRicardo 01:23, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Note that there are more where that came from. Gazpacho 02:03, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Needs work, but part of an ongoing project and already listed for Wikification. No reason to delete, unless you want to reopen the debate on Paris and London railway stations too. Andrewa 04:00, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• keep. Xtra 05:55, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, let it grow. Wyss 06:19, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Lots of people are interested in railway stations. Delete these articles and they might leave and therefore never contribute to anything else. Philip 06:54, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Samaritan 10:16, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Plenty of articles on train stations around the world. Capitalistroadster 10:28, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Agree with Capitalistroadster. --JuntungWu 13:13, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. The articles on various British railway stations are interesting and useful, this has the potiential to be as well. Thryduulf 13:24, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Inherently notable as both public infrastructure and a major Sydney transport hub.--Centauri 13:32, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Seems rather short, (and pointless wittering shouldn't be added just to make a short to the point article a long, flabby and annoying article) but if there isn't an appropriate article to merge this with, then it should be kept separate. Average Earthman 17:00, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• abstain I believe that someone is intending to have short articles about all airports and train stations, etc. with the intention that you could use wikilinks to see how to get from one place to another. (I became aware of this when I was observing some apparently useless articles about New York City subway stations). Morris 19:03, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• We keep railway stations, even when they are just a platform and a hut, but we delete schools. How merry a place this is!Dr Zen 00:44, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Actually, plenty of schools are kept if they are sensible articles, deserve/have more than one/two lines and can't be merged with the parent location. zoney ♣ talk 14:13, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That would be all of them then. --Centauri 23:30, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. zoney ♣ talk 14:13, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - David Gerard 19:59, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion

[edit] Timetable info

According to the timetable effective from 4 Sept 2005, the only East Hills inbound trains stopping at Sydenham on weekdays are at 5am, 7.26, 7.41, 7.56 and 8.11am, and (except on Fridays) 11.59pm. To me this looks a lot like running in the morning peak only. JPD 11:40, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Taciturn

Is a dictionary entry, and Wiktionary already has an entry for this word. JoaoRicardo 06:21, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete the dicdef. Wyss 06:18, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, already in wiktionary. Mgm|^(talk) 11:07, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, definition. Cookiecaper 13:32, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete an article already in the Wiktionary. I don't think the example is a good one either. --Deathphoenix 15:13, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Roadrunners

A band in New Jersey. Formed in 2001. No articles link here, but it is linked by VIP, a user talk page, and a user page. Google for "the roadrunners" is tainted by sports teams and such, so a reasonable search for "The Roadrunners" "Alex Smith" (Smith is the first band member mentioned in the article) was used, which returns 10 hits. A user identifying himself as a member of the band stated on the talk page that "no one outside of Haddonfield, New Jersey, a town of 2 miles square, has heard of The Roadrunners." Delete. - Vague | Rant 01:35, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Fails the google test miserably. Having existed since 2001, if this band was remotely notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia, they would have some kind of web presence; even if only from fans. →Reene^✎ 01:40, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable, fails Google Test. Megan1967 03:23, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, vanity ad. Wyss 06:17, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• No Vote In addition to these Roadrunners, there was a semi-famous band from Liverpool in the 1960s called the Roadrunners (geocities site-beware of the pop-ups) and another band named Jim Edgar and the Roadrunners that cut a 45 with Scepter records in the 1970s (Tennessee Stud/Wait A Little Longer). If anyone wants to write an article, the Liverpool band is probably the most notable of the three (despite the pop-ups).
• Delete non-notable vanity. --Deathphoenix 15:05, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete unless article establishes notability. Tuf-Kat 23:56, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Chupaqueso

This is an extremely long article about some trivia from a web comic. The comic gets around 200,000 Google hits. This term gets 67. DCEdwards1966 01:43, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, trivial, not notable. Megan1967 03:22, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. (Potentially an amusing enough page on the author's own website.) -- Hoary 03:54, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)
• Delete, recipe. Wyss 06:15, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, recipes don't belong here, recipe itself isn't notable either. Mgm|^(talk) 11:12, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable, obscure, recipe. --Deathphoenix 15:09, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Neutral, comment: I seem to recall a Wiki-cookbook. Could this article be moved there? -- Kizor 19:00, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Do Not Delete: Howard Taylor allowed this to be put in Wikipedia. See [4] for details. STrRedWolf 23:34, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • But that doesn't mean the Wikipedia agrees. -- Kizor 11:45, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Do Not Delete: The page should be pruned back (WAAAY back) to a simple definition, rather than an entire recipe, and the recipe posted elsewhere and linked to. The word has entered geek lexicon in a number of places, and a respectable number of people are actually EATING it, as evidenced by its appearance in their blogs [5] HowardTayler 23:34, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Do Not Delete: Although if there is a more appropriate wiki associated with wikipedia, it could go there instead. Kazriko 06:44, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This article is part of WikiProject The Simpsons, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to The Simpsons on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Tasks you can do: Here are some tasks you can do: edit Copyedit: The Simpsons Merge: Clancy Bouvier→ List of characters from The Simpsons (Discuss first) Fat Tony→ Springfield Mafia (Discuss first) Gina Vendetti→ List of one-time characters from The Simpsons Cleanup: The Simpsons DVDs page- add commentaries in charts that are easy to read for all the seasons Expand: List of awards won by The Simpsons Stubs: Bongo Comics, Al Jean, Mark Kirkland, Jim Reardon, Bart Simpson's Guide to Life, Josh Weinstein, Bill Oakley, Bart's Nightmare, Bartman, More... Update: List of The Simpsons episodes

from VfD:

Single episode joke from The Simpsons. sjorford 15:47, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Simpsons fancruft. — Asbestos | Talk 17:25, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Merge with Made-up words in The Simpsons. --Deathphoenix 17:41, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Merge. As above. Carrp 17:44, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as cruft, Merge as appropriate. Wyss 22:57, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Merge with Made-up words in The Simpsons then add redirect. Megan1967 00:31, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• It was a notable parody of cults, with specific references to some widely-discussed religions, and it was the the subject of the entire episode. Also, take a look at Category:Fictional religions. Merge if appropriate, and cleanup, but ultimately keep the information. Samaritan 20:56, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Merge as above, and cleanup as neccisary. --InShaneee 21:13, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• This page is about a made up religion, not a made up word and thus does not fit into the article on Made-up words in The Simpsons. Rather it should be merged into the article on the episode in question, when that page is created. - SimonP 01:59, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion

[edit] Heaven's Gate reference

The Movementarians in this episode also have obvious parallels with the Heaven's Gate cult. Maybe someone more competent than me could update? --EyeResist 09:33, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Special K

Man, why did that scene get cut from syndication? Lenny's bizarrely appropriate line about Burns being 'no bowl of Special K' made me laugh out loud the ONE time it was run. Was it cut out because Kellogg's and/or Disney wanted them not to use their logos? I sorta doubt that..

[edit] Robert Ludlum

That old guy in the airport asks a book seller if he has anything by Robert Ludlum, to which the seller replies: "Get out". Was there something about a hijacking in some of his books? I'm not sure I get this reference.

[edit] Henrik Aas

Looks like a hoax, judging by context of webpages "rumpa mi" is used in it means "fuck me". --fvw* 17:50, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)

• Delete. Odd hoax. jni 18:11, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Yes, very odd. --Deathphoenix 19:19, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete both as silly and sneaky vandalism (seeding WP with misleading or false information). Wyss 22:55, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy. 23:09, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable, hoax. Megan1967 00:30, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy, obvious joke or hoax. Yes, "rumpa mi" returns mostly web pages in the .no domain with names like www.erotikknett.no, and sexnoveller.no - de frekkeste noveller på nettet, and Norges Sex Portal. Style is vaguely reminiscent to me of the Yopu hoax article we had a few weeks ago, but IP address doesn't match. I'm going to speedy it now, anyone who wants it restored just let me know. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:02, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC) Entire content of article was:

Aas, Henrik is widely know as the man in the leather outfit. A version of this legend is preserved in a late fifteenth-century manuscript, in a story called "Rumpa mi", written by the man from God knows where. As the Aasusian mythos was retold and embellished upon, Henrik's prophetic aspects were sometimes de-emphasized in favor of portraying him as a economical wizard.

• Comment, "rumpa mi" means "my butt". Inter 19:36, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Thanks! I don't know why I didn't guess that. Are "rumpa" and the English "rump" cognates? Dpbsmith (talk) 21:58, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Trolliban

Combination of not-notable and hoax. --fvw* 17:50, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)

• Delete. Google gives about 35 hits, most of which are WP mirrors or postings that mention Trolliban in passing in various discussion fora. Troll groups must generate lots of mayhem before being considered notable in Wikipedia. jni 18:10, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Many of those hits are because Wikipedia has had the phrase "The Trolliban" on Troll organization since 172.145.73.53 added it on June 4, 2004. (Now that The Trolliban exists, that number of hits has almost doubled.) Discussions about this article are pre-supposing that such a group actually exists. But the legitimacy of the actual existence of such a group seems based entirely upon what has previously been written on Wikipedia. Uncle G 13:18, 2005 Jan 13 (UTC)

• Delete not notable. I'd say trollers are pretty much non-notable by definition. Starblind 18:20, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Individual trolling groups are not encyclopedic.-gadfium 18:40, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable enough even for an inclusing in Internet trolls. Reeks of vanity. --Deathphoenix 19:20, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, troll vanity, prank. Wyss 22:54, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as we all know, wikipedia does consider individual troll groups notable, but delete anyway because they actually aren't notable no matter how desperately they seek attention to fill their otherwise empty lives. Michael Ward 02:53, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable. If it even exists, it merits no more than a mention on the "Troll organizations" article. jdb ❋ 05:50, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Elite trolls indeed. What next? Elite spammers? Elite drug pushers? As Calvin's dad once said, Another day, another dollar, another irreplaceable chunk out of a finite and rapidly vanishing lifetime. How sad that these people have nothing better to do with theirs. Their petty trolling does not make them exciting, interesting or encyclopedic, and we do nobody any favours by nurturing any suggestion that it does. Andrewa 11:12, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Well, you know that my vote was Speedy Delete, as vandalism, because it was my {{deletebecause|joke article}} that fvw removed and replaced with a {{vfd}}. elite trolls from the 1990s? Trolluminati? It was like throwing a match onto gasoline.? Come on! This is a joke article created by 144.137.33.156 under the guise of being an attempt to make a real article out of a vandalism article created by 24.130.116.56. Uncle G 13:18, 2005 Jan 13 (UTC)

[edit] WikidPad

Advert for someone's software, founded on 12 Jan 2005 (actually it says 'found' on Jan 12) DJ Clayworth 18:02, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Smoddy | Talk 18:06, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete obvious ad, even for a notepad on steroids. --Deathphoenix 19:21, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, advertisement. Good idea though, anyone know of a similar freebie? It must be there somewhere. Andrewa 20:05, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, software ad. Wyss 22:53, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Adam Jung

Glowing tribute to someone whose main notability is involvement in some sort of unspecified bureaucratic fuss at the Campus Greens organization. He doesn't seem notable to me, and the article is also very POV given that the first page I find on Google [11] describes Jung as part of the problem. --LeeHunter 18:04, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Problem or solution, it's non-notable in any reasonable encyclopedic sense. This also reeks of vanity. Starblind 18:42, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete vanity better suited for a user page (Userfy?). --Deathphoenix 19:23, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Subject not sufficiently notable, article is the first and so far only contribution by this IP and possible autobiography. The fuss is some time ago now, but obviously someone still feels it. Andrewa 19:47, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Smoddy | Talk 21:09, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as vanity self-promotion. Wyss 22:49, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable, possible vanity. Megan1967 00:29, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• "Adam was raised between his grandfather's farm and St. Joseph, MO" What, in a field somewhere? Not notable. Delete. RickK 00:32, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Vanity, thy name is Jung.Weaponofmassinstruction 06:55, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Robert Marshall

Obvious hoax. jni 18:15, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete vanity. I have a couple of inventions deemed classified by all eight countries last year and will not be publically released until 2054. --Deathphoenix 19:24, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Deleted, candidate for speedy deletion case #2 or #3. Entire contents: This man is one real genious! He has invented invetions such as the "hydro space-craft", the "Self driving car", the "polo sweet" and "Football". Unfortunatly six of the eight most powerfull countries in the world have deemed the first two inventions "Classified" and will not be publically released until 2055. This is such obvious nonsense that it is either a test or pure vandalism. This IP's other recent contributions have been reverted as vandalism. Andrewa 19:34, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Robbie humphreys

Puerile vanity. I can't believe we don't yet have a policy that allows me to delete this immediately. DJ Clayworth 19:23, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• It's a childish personal attack on the subject, and libellous. Speedy it. Kappa 20:04, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. IMO it would be a valid candidate for speedy deletion under case #2 (test) or #3 (pure vandalism), we don't need to know which it is as either way it goes. Andrewa 20:48, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete vandalism and anti-vanity. I agree with Andrewa that this would be a CSD under #3. --Deathphoenix 21:05, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete as vandalism and libel (obvious middle school prank). Wyss 22:48, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy delete for reasons stated. Some idiot is getting his laughs at someone else's expense. - Lucky 6.9 22:55, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Speedy deleted as per consensus above. Andrewa 23:53, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC) from VfD:

This is nonsense. Funny nonsense. But nonsense. Or it could be a vanity... Smoddy | Talk 20:37, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete or Move to BJAODN. --Deathphoenix 21:07, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Keep This is a show currently running on Cartoon Network, as mentioned. Needs work, and should maybe be moved to Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends, but it IS a real show and, IMHO, relevant. Just occured to me that Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends exists, and there doesn't seem to be anything here mergeable. Changing to Delete --InShaneee 21:12, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. Sean Curtin 22:14, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, fiction, not an article. Wyss 22:46, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. There's already a good extant article and the lack of an apostrophe in "Fosters" might be a common misspelling of the title. Whoever wrote the article probably typed the title incorrectly in the first place and filled in the resulting red link. - Lucky 6.9 22:51, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect.Cookiecaper 23:22, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. Rossami (talk) 23:43, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. Megan1967 00:27, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. Samaritan 21:27, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. Please note that this was not nonsense, or fiction; it was instead information about a fiction which unfortunately neglected to note its context. -- Antaeus Feldspar 00:37, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion

from VfD:

Move I want to move the article to the VIA C3 page. Each version of the Athlon is covered on the same page. You can't create a newpage every time VIA update their processor range. Timharwoodx 15:26, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• This nomination was accidentally set up in a way that made it appear to be a comment at the bottom of the previous discussion thread. I've fixed the header. I also moved it down a day so it can get the full 5 day discussion now that it's visible. (no vote.) Rossami (talk) 21:35, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Move it. Wyss 22:43, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Move. Thryduulf 22:59, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC).
• Move as directed. --Deathphoenix 01:15, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Comment: if you just want to merge the two articles together, you can go ahead and do it - there's no need to bring it to VfD. Just copy and paste the text from one into the other, and turn VIA C7 into a redirect. Also, I notice there's a VIA C4 article, which should presumably be dealt with the same way. sjorford 21:18, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Okay, thanks guys, still learning the trade. I really wanted to fill out the write up on VIA's approach to chip architecture, as their low power low cost approach, may well shortly become the way to do it. I think its noteworthy. I have now cut and pasted the content. Just trying not to be rude. Timharwoodx 00:11, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion

[edit] Bram Crevits

I can't find any evidence of notability. --fvw* 21:25, 2005 Jan 12 (UTC)

• Delete, vanity self-promotion. Wyss 22:42, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Not necessary. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind (talk) 23:02, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable, possible vanity. Megan1967 00:23, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, vanity. --Deathphoenix 01:16, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• delete google Michael Ward 02:50, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Google?! That's a big step ther...oh, you were talking about this dross, weren't you. Yes, delete. hfool/Roast me 04:43, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Russian (usage)

This article, and Russian (spelling), were created by User:Mikkalai because he felt some links to Russian (language) were "clutter". Apparently it was inconvenient for him to have so many articles linking to Russian (language) merely because a person happened to speak Russian, or a word was spelled in Russian. However, this change matches no policy I am aware of, was carried out unilaterally, and is certainly inconvenient for the reader of the article, who in my view is more important in this case. Jayjg | (Talk) 21:25, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. See Talk:Russian (spelling) for the reasons and further discussion. Also, I'd like to point at a hostile attitude ot Jayig, who started chasing me all over my edits without talking. Only on a brink of vioulating 3-revert rule he/she/it started using normal procedures of resolving disagreements. Mikkalai 21:36, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Actually, I first put it on the Village Pump (policy) page for comment, and when others agreed that it was a bad idea, then I reverted the changes. And it was only after you actually violated the 3RR on a couple of articles defending your unilateral change that I brought it here for VfD. Jayjg | (Talk) 21:47, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • It doesn't matter that you talked to some buddies. The point is you reverted my changes without talking to me. I find this arrogant and disrespoectful. And I didn't violate 3-revert rule. Learn to count (or English language), buddy. There were 4 edits, 3 of which were reverts of yours. The first one was good old plain honest edit. Mikkalai 23:41, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • What pissed me off most that you lurked there silently, counting "One, Two, Three, BANG! GOTCHA!" This berhavior is simply disgusting. Anyone can check I never reverted twice in a row, not to say 3 times. I am a pretty reasonable guy. But this demonstration of blatant disrespect made me break my own rule.Sorry. Mikkalai 23:41, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • There is no policy that forbids me to do what I did. You are probably confusing tthe Soviet and Western notions of freedom. It is in totalitarian Soviet Union only things listed in the Law were allowed, and the rest was forbidden. What is more, there are precedents of pages that serve purely technical convenience: disambig pages. Mikkalai 21:36, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
      • This page doesn't disambig anything, it just removes "clutter" for your convenience. Jayjg | (Talk) 22:01, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
        • The issue of reader's inconvenience is discussed at the Talk:Russian (spelling) page as well. Mikkalai 21:43, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. While I agree with Mikkalai that there is a problem with too many links to the Russian language article, I do not see how creating technical pages is an acceptable resolution.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 22:07, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete: Don't think it's a worthwhile thing to do and just adds extra clicks. violet/riga (t) 22:10, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, does not help readers. - SimonP 22:13, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Horrible idea. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 22:15, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete this unilaterally implemented bad idea Cdc 22:28, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect both. Will cause nothing but confusion for anyone following a link to these from anywhere but here of the pump. -Sean Curtin 22:32, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • The problem with a re-direct is that it will create double re-directs in all those articles Mikkalai has changed to point to his pages. Double re-directs don't work, causing even more problems for the user. At least if they're deleted, then we can finally change the articles he has re-directed to point back to where they are supposed to, since he apparently won't allow anyone to do that now. Jayjg | (Talk) 22:50, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • Not entirely sure how it would if you set the redirect to go to the final destination page and not another redirect. violet/riga (t) 23:33, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete bad idea. How is it detrimental to have lots of pages linking to Russian language? Tuf-Kat 22:33, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Because I simply cannot find pages that discuss Russian language per se. All what I see are pages that say how, e.g., Tsar Bomba is written with Russian letters. Mikkalai 23:41, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • What's wrong with using categories? Tuf-Kat 23:59, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
      • Categories will not help me to find discussion of Russan language in, e.g., Centum (what the heck is this!!! Wow! Never heard!) Backlinks is an extremely powerful feature that distinguishes wikipedia among many other online reference tools. I hated to see its usability effectively killed in this particular case. Mikkalai 00:12, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as above. Wyss 22:41, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as unnecessary. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind (talk) 23:14, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. A. Shetsen 22:52, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC) If it doesn't work for technical reasons (see above), rewrite. Mikkalai's idea has some merit. Perhaps Russian language should be replaced with Russian to help the user disambiguate. A. Shetsen 22:55, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Ever heard about redirect-fighting nazis, armed with robots and all? Mikkalai 00:21, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I see the problem but this doesn't make the situation any better. It goes from one problem to another. Jeltz talk 22:58, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • No it is not. But well, you outvoted me. Mikkalai 23:41, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect, as explained on the talk page. --Joy [shallot] 23:23, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Forget about redirect. If (actually, when :-) I will be outvoted, I will clean up all links to this page back to where they were. I am well aware that many geniuses are recognized only postmortem. :-) Mikkalai 23:30, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• My question is why to you need to know every page linking to Russian language? Evil Monkey → Talk 23:42, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • I donn't need every pages that link to Ru Lang now. I want to see all pages that discuss the language, rather than say how Minsk is written with Russian letters. Mikkalai 23:47, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • Then add them as links in the main article, surely? violet/riga (t) 23:56, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
      • How would I find them in the first place? Ever heard about e.g., Centum? Also, there is a pretty fat chance that some smartjay will decide that Centum has only cursory relation to the article and delete the link. (Such cases did occur.) Mikkalai 00:17, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Evil Monkey → Talk 23:32, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Sure, you evil one. With my own hands I will slay my child in despair. Mikkalai 23:47, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not very practical or functional. Megan1967 00:22, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • How come? Perfectly functional, and very practical. In your spare time, please look at the article and at its talk page, and think about the problem it tries to solve. If you don't understand something, please ask there a question. Mikkalai 00:26, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Bad precedent. And Mikkalai, stop making personal attacks. RickK 00:35, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • So far it was personal defense and explanation why I went into a distress. Nice turning of the tables. Thanks. Mikkalai 00:39, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, because the page itself is content-free and meaningless. It's intended to be editor-friendly, but at the expense of being reader-hostile (no reader clicking on a "Russian" link wants to go to this page). Mikkalai does raise a valid point about how some pages have so many backlinks that the feature becomes unusable, but this is a general problem (not just for language pages) that needs some other solution. -- Curps 02:09, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Also note Greek (spelling), which is the same thing (listing added below, if a separate vote is warranted).

Relax. I'll kill it quietly. It is also mine. Mikkalai

• Delete. I still don't understand the point. What's wrong with links to Russian language? Wikiacc 20:50, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Suggestion: When the links are changed back; maybe some of them shouldn't be links in the first place. I mean maybe instead of putting in "[[Russian]]" you should just put in "Russian" . That would probably help solve the original problem (where someone thought that there were too many links). I do agree tht there is a tendency to put in too many links in some articles. Morris 04:53, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I understand and recognize the problem that Mikkalai is pointing out but the present implementation is not the right solution. Discussion on this general problem should not be limited to Talk:Russian (spelling); this matter should be brought up for discussion on broader platforms. Wikipedia:WikiProject Languages might be such a place (however, as Curps points out, the problem is not limited to language pages.) — mark ✎ 19:27, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Greek (spelling)

See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Russian (usage). Same circumstances, same creator. Omitted from the original VfD for Russian (usage), so listed separately here. -- Curps 01:55, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Killing it myself. Mikkalai 03:05, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

from VfD:

Near-gibberish, not encyclopedic. silsor 23:10, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete this nonsense is so nonsensical that it wants to be patent nonsense when it grows up. PS: If anyone cares what a debug room really is, it's an in-game "room" where options can be set (picking characters, items, etc.). It's not generally accessable to players within the game, and must be accessed by cheating. The best known one is in Final Fantasy VII. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind (talk) 23:36, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Replace with the above text from Starblind (which I shall do in about sixty seconds), mark it a stub, and keep. I'd never heard of this, and I find it mildly interesting. I wouldn't mind seeing it expanded. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:40, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• IMHO we should keep now that it has been fixed/stubbedIzwalito
• Keep the revision, it's helpful. Wyss 03:05, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, something I'd never heard of before. Now I want to figure out how to add one to GDB. :-) Stan 04:58, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Now a good stub. Andrewa 10:44, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep in its current form. I learned something new today. --Deathphoenix 14:31, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Merge into game programming and redirect. JoaoRicardo 03:44, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, needs cleanup and expansion. Megan1967 01:23, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion

[edit] Tips on how to be romantic

Not encyclopedic material. Possibly transwiki, but I'm not sure where.-gadfium 23:20, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. or transwiki as a "How to"? ;) Rmhermen 23:28, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
• delete. This reminds me very much of one of those email forwards. I haven't checked for a copyvio yet though. Thryduulf 23:49, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Comment I don't think it's a copyvio. No Google hits on things like "note surprise" "steam surprise". Built up by a single contributor, User:Kbg, incrementally in a long series of edits. Minor spelling and punctuation errors, probably typos rather than errors, such as "Balloon" spelled first correctly, then incorrectly as "baloon," are not typical of "one of those email forwards." But I think it does fall under the rubric of "personal essay" or "original research." I wonder whether the contributor has considered submitting this to a magazine... they seem to love articles that can be billed on the cover as "47 ways to..." or "22 great ideas for..." Dpbsmith (talk) 00:54, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete original research. It's not badly written, but it's not encyclopedic either. Perhaps Kbg should consider moving this to personal user space. --Deathphoenix 01:25, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, WP not a how-to manual. Wyss 03:04, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• I speedied it before it came here, because (i) in the form in which I read it it said almost nothing (it's grown a lot since), and (ii) at best it promised to become a how-to, and, well, see Wyss's comment. (I realized that strictly speaking neither of these was grounds for a speedy, but was under the impression, perhaps mistaken, that it's common practice to speedy new articles that have multiple serious problems.) So anyway, WP is not a how-to manual. (And even if it were, this would need a lot of work.) Delete. -- Hoary 03:31, 2005 Jan 13 (UTC)
  • Look, OK, I'm just being difficult and argumentative, but for the record I do NOT think there is any policy to the effect that "Wikipedia is not a how-to manual." Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not says nothing about this, and Wikipedia:How-to points squarely in the opposite direction. There's simply no consensus on this point, just as there isn't consensus about high schools. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:42, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - assumption that all this would apply to absolutely everyone is nonsense - Skysmith 09:54, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete this, smoothly, slowly, and sexily, baby. Ohhh yeah. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:40, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as personal essay/original research. This is not well-established factual, verifiable, properly sourced material. At best this is entertaining with a germ or two of truth in it. Entertaining essays with germs of truth in them are not encyclopedia articles. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:44, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete because this seems very specialized rather than pandemic. Maybe what works on his significant other doesn't work on everyone. In addition, this article uses a lot of slang words, is not wikified in the least bit, and needs too much improvement to be of encyclopedic value to anyone. Chardish 03:36, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Not an encyclopedia article. Delete. - Mike Rosoft 18:59, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] TrAcNet

This was nominated for investigation as recreated content. (previous debate) The content of this article is just enough different that I don't think it can be speedy deleted. See also Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Ban Currency Circulation from the same author. (no vote) Rossami (talk) 23:28, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. It's related enough to warrant a delete, if not a speedy delete. --Deathphoenix 01:29, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• I agree. Delete. Timbo ( t a l k ) 03:39, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I don't have access to the original content of TRACnet (the article of previous debate), but I strongly suspect this change of capitalization is just an attempt to subvert the previous deletion decision. Investicating this article on its own merit, I couldn't verify its contents. Google finds lots of stuff when trying various queries, but there's not enough context in article to find anything about this international consortium. jni 11:02, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

from VfD:

A fork of Clitoris. And misspelled. And a dicdef. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind (talk) 23:27, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

• • note: link added to title Thryduulf 23:52, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • Thank you. Sorry about that. My fault. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind (talk) 00:05, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. That's a reasonable misspelling. Rossami (talk) 23:49, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. (Reminds me of a time when I embarrassed myself in a junior high school math class by saying that a doughnut was an example of a torso). Dpbsmith (talk) 00:37, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • But topologically speaking, a torso is a doughnut, so... um. Yeah. Anyway. Redirect, doesn't hurt anyone. Shimgray 03:04, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Clitoris. Megan1967 00:52, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect as a common mispelling. --Deathphoenix 01:30, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect Wyss 03:01, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Simply redirect. GRider\^talk 23:36, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

end moved discussion