Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Young men

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty 11:27, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Young men

Original rant. — Phil Welch 01:07, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete and redirect to adolescence or something. -- Bobdoe (Talk) 02:09, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Slugs and snails and puppy dogs tails - not neutral. TheMadBaron 04:11, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect. The title is good, the silly little rant is not. In fact, heck. I'm going to redirect it to adolescence right now. (I didn't remove any of the other text of the page, since it said not to, but it redirects anyway) (also, please let me know if this is going grossly against policy here. It looked like a good thing to do, but if the week really has to be waited out, please let me know. I don't venture into this area of WP often.) Fieari 04:47, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Reverted. You can't remove the VfD notice while it's still listed. I know it's important to be bold, but this is worth waiting out, especially because the closing admin would have the chance to delete and redirect, helping to prevent a re-creation. — Phil Welch 04:52, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Adolescence. – AxSkov (☏) 07:23, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete then Redirect as above. --Apyule 08:58, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete: I seriously doubt that anyone is going to be looking for a discussion of adolescence when they go looking for young men, and that particular term is too narrow to be a redirect, IMO. Geogre 11:14, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, complete nonsense. — JIP | Talk 16:07, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
• I changed this into a definition; and I vote to re-direct to Boy if cannot be expanded to an article. 66.32.171.29 16:14, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
  • User's second edit. — Phil Welch 18:07, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
  • While I commend you for making the article less egregious, it's still a dictionary definition, and I doubt the room for expansion. Then again that's what the long deletion period is for :) — Phil Welch 18:07, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to adolescence, as Wikipedia is not the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and therefore doesn't need that snarky, NPOV tone. (I am speaking of the original, not the edits, which seem to me well-intentioned enough) --Jacqui M Schedler 02:41, 15 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.