Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charlos

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. 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. Joyous 02:55, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Charlos

non-notable — J3ff 00:15, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. This page should not be deleted because if it isn't "notable" then neither is 42% of the other stuff on here. -- Charlos 00:30, 2005 Feb 17
• Delete. Not-notable and he vandalised this page (see Special:Contributions/172.168.33.110) -- RWH 00:58, 2005 Feb 17 (UTC)
• Delete. Hey, it's that Charlos character who is not-notable enough to be on Wikipedia.
• Don't Delete. "Hey, it's that Charlos character who is not-notable enough to be on Wikipedia. I'm dumb." is going to be in my book when I write an autobiography of my totally awesome life. People will laugh at you for saying that and say, "What a loser!"
  • FYI: According to the page history, 172.168.33.110 made that previous comment. Zzyzx11 05:23, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Strucken - one IP address one vote - is the rule. And the "keep" above is from this guy. -- RWH 05:32, 2005 Feb 17 (UTC)
  • To Charlos: The ones who voted to delete your article now currently believe that you are not notable yet. But I'll admit as soon you become notable in the future, we might reconsider -- just as long as you don't keep on vandalised this page. Zzyzx11 05:28, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable, vanity. Megan1967 06:20, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oh, speedy delete this crap. RickK 06:57, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Did a 30-something year old write this? Man, I hope not. That would just be sad. Delete (speedy would be even better). -R. fiend 07:35, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. CSD should be expanded to cover obvious crap like this. Ten years in a college and all he contributes to an encyclopaedia is some stupid vanity. Must be some diploma mill graduate. jni 08:46, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and block the idiot for vandalism. Trilobite (Talk) 10:32, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I'd say this sounds more like the writings of an autistic 13 year old than a 30 year old graduate. Average Earthman 14:20, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as patent non-sense. GRider\^talk 17:37, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • First off, this is not an encyclopedia. This is a haven for scrabble players who think they have gigantic brains that would crush a mortal child. Ignorant teenagers may frequently use wilkpedia as a source during arguments on live journal but no adults respect you guys. Come on. Half the stuff on here (a conservative estimate) is written by people less qualified than a baby. You guys aren't society's elite. You are hippies. Get over yourself and quit polluting the Internet with random crap passed off as factual information. Nobody respects you. Everyone thinks this place is trash the minute they figure out that anyone can edit it. You guys are no better than the other editable "encyclopedias" like that urban dictionary and whatever. Grow up.

p.s. I am way smarter than all of you together. My brain is the size of a dump truck. *flex*

• Edit by 172.152.133.228.
• I completely agree with everything 172.152.133.228 says. Wikipedia is crap and personally I am a hippie with an overinflated ego. However, none of this is germane to the VfD discussion of this particular article, which should be Deleted as unencyclopedic, vanity, possible prank or hoax, but in any case a biographical article on a non-notable person. Dpbsmith (talk) 14:43, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • • Could somebody BJAODN that bit about the scrabble players with child-crushing brains? Radiant! 13:04, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- Longhair 12:27, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.