Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christmas tree (bodybuilding)

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. —Kurykh 00:10, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Christmas tree (bodybuilding)

Christmas tree (bodybuilding) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This article is incredibly short and I see no possibility it could ever be explained. It needs to be merged with one of numerous bodybuilding articles. There's no reason for it to exist as a separate article. Numerous other articles probably already contain the same information, which is simply a sentence. Wikidudeman (talk) 05:05, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete I don't think it even needs to be incorporated into any other article. There is no content there. Bigwyrm 07:27, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - Per nom, per Bigwyrm, and per WP:NEO, and WP:NOT#DICTIONARY. Cool Bluetalk to me 18:25, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - Per WP:DICDEF. Oregongirl0407 01:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete origional research and stub.--SefringleTalk 05:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
  • strong keep. Perfectly good article. Sure, it's short right now, but that can change. It'd be good to have someone knowledgeable about anatomy to add content. And maybe a list of famous bodybuilders who have christmas trees. And maybe some pictures of christmas trees on famous BBs. I have been meaning to do this myself but can't find photos with appropriate copyrights. It is absolutely not OR: it's standard terminology in the BB world. And, if the article is expanded along the lines I suggest above, would be unsuitable for a dictionary entry. I'm only sorry I can't contribute to the article myself (not for lack of trying). Keep keep keep. Robinh 11:13, 3 July 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.