Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LD distributors

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. —Xezbeth 06:15, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] LD distributors

NN, prosletyzing. Firebug 06:57, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, not notable, advert. Megan1967 07:49, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, Seems notable to me, as there are no website links that sell anything. This is the first edit of 67.150.100.85 (talk · contribs), whose second edit was to vandalize Megan1967's vote.
• Delete, just seems to be an article to driect peopel to a religious website, otherwise called an advertisment. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 09:43, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete seems non-notable. --Laura Scudder | Talk 09:46, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable, vote vandalism. android↔talk 15:47, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete firmly, both because the article is non-encyclopedic and because vote-tampering like 67.150.100.85 (talk · contribs) and 67.150.98.207 (talk · contribs) have been up to should be smacked down hard. -- Antaeus Feldspar 17:48, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Note An anonymous user is changing other users' votes. The admin deciding consensus should check the authenticity of votes. Smoddy (_t^g_e^c_k) 10:54, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• del ad, NN, POV, etc. BigFatDave 22:02, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Nonnotable fundycruft. Haikupoet 00:15, 18 Apr 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.