Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/(Book of Mormon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 01:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] (Book of Mormon
- This actually has the wrong title--it should be JACOB, not BOOK OF MORMON. I couldn't figure out how to change it. So, instead of deleting it, could you show me how to fix it, or fix it yourself so it makes more sense? As it says, Jacob is a character in the Book of Mormon. This Jacob is completely different than the Bibical Jacob. Remember, just because you don't like the article doesn't mean others won't be looking for it. Thanks. Reds0xfan
There is already an article on the Book of Mormon, and this article seems to be only about a character from the book, Jacob, anyway. Delete, as there is already a very good article on Jacob. J Milburn 18:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- delete per nom. Artw 19:08, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delete - would make a horrible redirect. bd2412 T 19:56, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- I don't understand - why not redirect: who'd it be hurting? zafiroblue05 | Talk 21:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- I understand that redirects are cheap, but who is going to search for this? Danny Lilithborne 21:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well, considering someone made the typo once, someone could make it again. Redirects aren't just cheap, they are absolutely free (unless a potential article could be made in its place, which isn't an issue here). zafiroblue05 | Talk 00:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Except this isn't a typo article, it's an article created through a badly written "redlink" at Book of Jacob. Danny Lilithborne 04:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well, considering someone made the typo once, someone could make it again. Redirects aren't just cheap, they are absolutely free (unless a potential article could be made in its place, which isn't an issue here). zafiroblue05 | Talk 00:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- I understand that redirects are cheap, but who is going to search for this? Danny Lilithborne 21:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- I don't understand - why not redirect: who'd it be hurting? zafiroblue05 | Talk 21:35, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- Strong Delete doesn't help Wikipedia at all. Danny Lilithborne 20:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delete: redundant to Jacob (prophet), which is apparently where it belongs. This seems to have been made as the result of a badly formed link at Book of Jacob. - Smerdis of Tlön 21:56, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- I fixed the bad link. Smerdis of Tlön 22:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and above. -- NORTH talk 23:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delete already an article
- Merge and Redirect --Vergardio 01:00, 25 July 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.
