Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ambiguous Names and Initials

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. --Coredesat 06:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ambiguous Names and Initials

Ambiguous Names and Initials (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Original research, unverifiable. No sources. Chick Bowen 02:09, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete I wouldn't say it's unverifiable, or at least, not in concept. It is, however lacking sources. But even if that were rectified, I think that'd be covering over the real problem with the article, which is that it's going into a bit of trivial detail in listing each and every puzzle included in the books. There might be some way to cover it appropriately, but I've not seen it yet. FrozenPurpleCube 02:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete. Wikipedia is not Geocities; we don't host personal fan pages. (Not that it isn't an interesting subject, but it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia.) --Quuxplusone 03:51, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete The names and initial useage is not notable part of the works and thus does not deserve an article as per WP:FICT. The problem with this is it would only ever be sourced from primary works, which makes it all original research without a secondary reliable source.--Dacium 04:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Very interesting, but unencyclopedic. ¿ςפקιДИτς! ☺ ☻ 14:09, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete The article is just extrapolation from a work of fiction. Without secondary sources it's original research. Jay32183 20:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Very interesting, but violation of WP:OR. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 00:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete OMG, what an ORrible mess! Ohconfucius 06:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as original research. I'm sure it would fit very well on a Lemony Snicket fansite or such, but it's not right for Wikipedia. -- Mithent 13:46, 3 May 2007 (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.