Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dirty pirate

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. dbenbenn | talk 20:07, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dirty pirate

There is nothing more I can say. Samaritan 05:18, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Original research. --MarkSweep 06:14, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Doesn't belong here. also dict-def, non-notable and non-sense. RJFJR 06:17, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Made up terminology. Mgm|^(talk) 09:42, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete not even anatomically possible, as it would require that both the perpetrator and victim be simultaneously laying down and standing up. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:08, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, prank, vanity neologism, borderline speedy. Wyss 19:51, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Ooh, rather imaginative. Gross, but imaginative. I recall a bunch of similar "how-to" articles a few months back. Most were deleted. Shiver me timbers and delete this too, mateys! Avast, ye scurvy scum! - Lucky 6.9 00:24, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Spinboy 23:06, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Of course it's possible! The victim would have to be squating as the perpetrator would be standing and facing him/her, thus the possible ejaculation into the eye because the penis and eyes are at the same level. Then, you can kick them in the shin. So it can be done. But it's sick and wrong, so get rid of this. Frank12
• Delete. Sounds like something that should be on Urbandictionary.com
• Delete. unless a parrot could be worked in there somewhere :) --Monk Bretton 23:55, 17 Feb 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.