Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Engi no jutsu

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 was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Engi no jutsu

Overly lengthy entry about a non-notable Naruto role-playing forum. Reads off like an FAQ for the site, something Wikipedia is not. Fails WP:WEB test of notability. NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 05:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

ATTENTION! If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether a page or group of pages is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! Note: Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username|UTC timestamp [optional]}}

I'm not seeing any sockpuppets, anyone care to explain? Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 08:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I imagine it's preemptive, since this is a forum we're talking about here (it's also a Naruto fan forum, which makes things a bit worse). --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 08:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. — Dark Shikari ^talk/_contribs 05:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 05:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as pure vanity. 728 Ghits, all of which appears to be from forum posts. Fails WP:WEB miserably and also runs afoul of all three principles of Wikipedia: WP:NPOV, WP:NOR and WP:V. I'll caution that we may see a bit of meatpuppetry with this nomination. --TheFarix (Talk) 10:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Per above notability, original research and verifiability concerns. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 11:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Violates the main three principles per theFarix, and any notability principles regardless. ColourBurst 14:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per TheFarix - Whpq 16:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --- Hong Qi Gong 19:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as vanity for a non-notable website. Also fails WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, and Wikipedia is not a repository of external links. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 06:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and above, as it fails web. --Kunzite 12:38, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Alexie 23:28, 31 August 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.