Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myg0t

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

The result of the debate was Deleted and protected from recreation by Marudubshinki.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  06:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Myg0t

OR, GHits are a bunch of junk links. Also shows up in Wiktionary; should probably be deleted there too. Deleted and undeleted more times than I've edited my userpage. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 00:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete I'm undecided between G1 or A7 though. I'll be nice and say A7. ~Kylu (u|t) 03:08, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete and protect this page has had two previous AfDs, both of which were a clear consensus to delete. Obviously the page's creators don't respect those decisions as it has been re-created numerous times. --Hetar 03:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
• I seem to recall two previous AFDs, though I can't find them. Speedy delete as per above, based on criteria G4. Jude (talk,contribs,email) 03:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete because this page definitely had at least one AFD. Must protect as well. Funnybunny (^talk/_QRVS) 04:34, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
• Abstain, but don't speedy! This article was undeleted on WP:DRV; see the debate as it was just before delisting. See also the most recent lines of the log. Melchoir 04:36, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
• Please see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Myg0t & Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myg0t (2nd nomination). Perhaps we should apply {{deletedpage}} after re-deletion. -- PFHLai 04:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
• Cleanup & Keep page is a mess now, but highly notable. -Goldom 莨夊ｩｱ 謚慕ｨｿ 04:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and protect against recreation. This group appears to be non-notable. It is a small group (111 members are claimed) of vandals that got two minor news mentions. They like to get attention, disrupt the activities of others and embarrass people. They get a fair amount of hits on their website, but not that many and just getting a lot of hits would not make them notable. If they reached the level of borderline notability, I would say delete it so that they don't get recognition, but they don't even get that close. Also, it is likely that members and opponents will continuously vandalize the article and since they are not important, Wikipedia loses more than it gains by having it. -- Kjkolb 05:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

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