Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fuzztakus

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 of the debate was delete. Thryduulf 12:08, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fuzztakus

Fancruft, neologism, original non-notable fiction. Mr Bound 19:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete as per nom. Grafikm_fr 20:28, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. (Not sure it is fiction; it reads rather like a list of participants in some webforum. Not that it matters, of course). Henning Makholm 21:59, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Userfy or BJAODN or both. Fagstein 06:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. -- Samir (the scope) 06:42, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete Fine, so I'm biased as the maker of the page in question, and also a fuzztaku. Fine, so this page won't help you in your daily lives. What about the sentimental value to all the fuzztakus who've ever been to the entry in question? Here they are, finally with their own little, insignificant segment of Wikipedia, and the article gets put up for deletion. If I can't convince anyone here to not delete it, could you at least put it in the bad jokes and other deleted nonsense section, and perhaps leave a link on the former page? Is that too much to ask?--Special Penguin 16:43, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't delete Im also a fuzztaku so please don't delete it thank you --robro 15:36, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete Hardly notable and fancruft. This kind of stuff doesn't belong on wikipedia.--Cini 19:25, 23 April 2006 (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.