Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fudge riot

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. Robert ^{T | @ | C} 02:05, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Fudge riot

original research, seems like cruft --Phil 03:13, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

• Speedy delete. Hoax. The bandleader gets zero hits on Google. Seven unrelated returns for the supposed band name. This makes absurd claims for multiplatinum punk rock singles a decade before the genre existed. Durova 04:59, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Unverifiable. Being a suspected hoax isn't a criteria for a speedy. --W.marsh 07:06, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete --Syrthiss 13:15, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy delete: Being vandalism and being an attack page are both criteria, and the "I suck iguana tail records" sure seems like a kiddie attack. The rest of it seems like the knowingly untrue statements necessary for vandalism. All of which is not to say that folks should be too fast on the trigger or button, nor to criticize W.marsh's preference of VfD to CSD, but these sorts of articles are routine and fairly clear. Having been listed here and having multiple eyeballs look at it, moving it to CSD later seems reasonable in the absence of any defenders. Geogre 13:40, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Rogerd 05:24, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and Geogre. → Ξxtreme Unction {^yakł_blah} 14:51, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. *drew 00:24, 16 November 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.