Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TuBsEy DoGg ReCoRdS

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 delete. – Robert 00:08, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TuBsEy DoGg ReCoRdS

Non-notable record company. LordViD 20:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Sceptre ^(Talk) 20:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, and for god-awful capitalization. -Drdisque 20:44, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Ruby 20:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per it's not a real thing. Is that WP:V? - squibix 21:23, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Liamdaly620 21:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Check the new addition by User:TUBSEY, it's interesting. 68.39.174.238 21:32, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete WP:Complete_Bollocks Hard to believe that this is a genuine contribution at all.  (aeropagitica)  22:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and I would speedy it if I were just that little bit bolder. Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 22:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - I can barely make sense of it, so unfortunately it's not patent nonsense. It does fall under WP:BALLS, though -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 03:13, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, nonsense. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-24 06:31Z
• Delete!! warpozio 08:54, 24 January 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.