Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1:26

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. —Xezbeth 09:42, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 1:26

Verbatim text of Bible verse with no commentary (other than links to other articles to imply an interpretation) -- Tetraminoe 06:53, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as a copyvio... erm, no... because it's useless, as it merely quotes a Bible verse with no encyclopedic content. Wikipedia is not a copy of the Bible. — JIP | Talk 09:35, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a bible copy. Note: I'll remove the link to List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual people from the article. Doesn't belong there. Mgm|^(talk) 12:00, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete for reasons above. Also poorly titled. Eric119 18:16, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: I expanded it a bit; please check now and re-vote. —msh210 22:04, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Nope, still delete. It doesn't matter if you include Chapter 1, verse 26 from every book of the Bible, unless you are going to make informed (not original research) commentary, this is not an encyclopedia article. RickK 23:30, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
    • Actually, I was kidding. See my edit summary on this VFD subpage on April 27. —msh210 18:11, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete for reasons above. Distinguished from VFD debate on John 20:16 as John 20:16 and similar articles have commentary.--AYArktos 23:51, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete utterly useless and nonencyclopedic. --Angr/_comhrá 05:45, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Doesn't wikibooks have a bible? If not, why not? Radiant_* 10:56, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

Isn't Wikibooks for writing open textbooks? I hope we're not writing a new Bible :) Wikisource might have one, though. -- Tetraminoe 17:28, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Wikisource has several Bibles. They're not all complete, though. --Angr/_comhrá 20:56, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - Tεxτurε 18:19, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- Wikipedia is not the bible - Longhair | Talk 04:21, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete nonencyclopedic, doesn't even have any commentary on the text. Leithp 07:55, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - This looks like the "hard coded" results of a search through a bible database. Individual search results should not be made into articles. Just use database software instead. - Pioneer-12 10:19, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
• Del nonencyc —msh210 18:11, 3 May 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.