Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Man Named Eric Imken

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 03:11, May 29, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A Man Named Eric Imken

Vanity. Funny though. Barfooz (talk) 01:17, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

• No evidence of notability. Delete.-gadfium 01:22, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Vanity, would belong in Geocities--Absurdist 02:43, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete: Brought a tear to my eye. Choose the fields, kid! Choose the fields! Don't buy dreams from merchants! Don't let the merchandisers and marketers into your fantasies: invent your own. Geogre 03:17, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Send to BJAODN. CDThieme 04:22, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• I laughed. I cried. I went to see it again. Eric where's your user page?! WP:-). DoubleBlue (Talk) 06:05, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable, vanity. Megan1967 06:35, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• BJAODN --the wub (talk) 07:30, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• I can't wait for Part Two, but reluctant delete. BJAODN though. Proto 10:30, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• I BJAODNised it. Delete it now. --bainer (talk) 12:25, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete vanity. - Etacar11 23:24, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete before he writes Part Two. — P Ingerson (talk) 23:41, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete or move to WP:-), vanity, original research and BJAODN. --metta, The Sunborn 03:39, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
• Move to BJAODN for others to enjoy. --Fazdeconta 13:03, 24 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.