Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/29a

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. Linuxbeak | Talk 22:28, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 29a

Also See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benny/29a -- (☺drini♫|☎) 18:11, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - vanity/advert for their group and weblogs (see the three weblog links and long list of members) -Tεxτurε 19:13, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete non notable group.--Isotope23 20:44, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as nn scriptkiddiecruft. MCB 04:03, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete vanity - nn adv. Vsmith 16:04, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benny/29a Vsmith 16:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete nn group; no links from articles in main namespace; deadend; WP:NPOV; WP:V; WP:VAIN --Kgf0 18:25, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. NN. Even as "re-written" to just be the conversion to decimal. Wikibofh 14:16, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Vanity to say the least Masterhatch 10:44, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Anon votes

• DON'T DELETE - the world should know about the group and it is a notable group. What are you guys scared of? If you want to take down the links to the weblogs then fine take down the links. The member list should stay because there is a member list availble on the internet already! What's the point in deleting it!?!?!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.64.5.97 (talk • contribs) 2005-10-11 09:17:00 UTC
• Don't Delete Your making a big deal out of nothing. The links are off and it is a notable group. The article shall continue to be written and be up as long as there are no links to any weblogs (since your gonna make a big deal about it.) If you want your proof to the list of members then why don't you just go to this link [vx.netlux.org/lib/static/vdat/groups1.htm here]. Your denying the right for the public to view this information. This group has been in the news many times before. At the VERY least then leave the paragraph up about them and take the member list down. As I have said before this article shall remain up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.64.5.97 (talk • contribs) 2005-10-12 10:43:00 UTC

Note: above edit was intended to replace all delete votes, reverted by Kgf0 18:02, 12 October 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.