Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EWA

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 of the debate was DELETE, and thanks for the note, but I would have figured User:Francs2000 and User:Tuf-Kat know how to write "keep" instead of "Do Not Delete" anyway. — JIP | Talk 10:43, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] EWA

Bandcruft, vanity. No recordings etc. CambridgeBayWeather 13:11, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

• Marked for speedy deletion as nn-bio. Sandstein 14:39, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NMG. I don't think bands qualify for A7 though. --howcheng [ talk • contribs • web ] 16:28, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Do Not Delete, Was cited as being a 'work in progress' so it should be presumed that, for now, it is genuine- 17:03, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, as above. -R. fiend 20:18, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Do Not Delete, I have heard them mentioned on the UK's 'NewStyle Radio 98.7fm' - Francs2000 1:56, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
• Do Not Delete per WP:NMG. 7. They were featured on mass media [[1]in a story about local talent.- Tuf-Kat 3:14, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
• Note to closing admin: The "votes" by Francs2000 and Tuf-Kat as well as the unsigned vote were actually cast by an anon, namely User:82.46.138.72. See [2]. To you who did this, note that this type of behaviour is considered highly disruptive if not outright vandalism and can lead to you being blocked from editing. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:18, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
• Striking out forged votes. CambridgeBayWeather 11:53, 19 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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.