Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erts

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 05:17, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Erts

Erts (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

"The erts are a fictional group of drawing created by Ed Emberley"; appears to be non-notable; some possible nonsense; no relevant G hits [1]. Prod and Prod2 tags were removed by creator. _SUBWAYguy 06:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. WP:NFT, probably speedy delete, but I can't find the appropriate WP:CSD right now. Sandstein 06:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NFT. Probably speedy delete as patent nonsense. Resolute 07:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete borderline patent nonsense. JuJube 14:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Isn't an "ert" an ancient tree spirit or something? .V. (talk) 14:38, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Not according to Wiktionary or the Chambers or Houghton Mifflin dictionaries. Are you thinking of ent? Tonywalton  | Talk 15:24, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

*Delete I hate ents. Also, things made up in one day. .V. (talk) 15:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, very much non-notable. JIP | Talk 15:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Genuine, but not really notable even to mention in the main article, hence the change of heart. CiaranG 13:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC) Merge to Ed Emberley if someone can be bothered to source and salvage the almost incoherent text, otherwise delete. CiaranG 23:44, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

For the record, confirmation that there is indeed such a fictional group of creatures is here. I'm not suggesting it's notable, but as food for thought are we happy that what is probably a very young Wikipedian's first experience of editing is met with phrases such as "patent nonsense" and "incoherent text". It didn't take much effort to research this more thoroughly (initially using Wikipedia). I'm not trying to offend, or point fingers, particularly since having done said research I still came out with the latter phrase. CiaranG 13:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Doesnt assert notability. John Vandenberg 13:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable. --Duke of Duchess Street 18:59, 14 January 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.