Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liquid lurker

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. Kilo-Lima|(talk) 14:12, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Liquid lurker

Relevant policies: WP:WEB, WP:VAIN, WP:NOT (web directory, crystal ball)

Vanitycruft about a no-name website that's not even up yet. Sandstein 21:24, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

  • del nn. `'mikka (t) 21:35, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as per nomination. -- Scientizzle 22:27, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Indeed the site haven't been up yet, but we got up and steady forum board ready for new users, while waiting for the main site to launch. Koppy 22:31, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom.--blue520 23:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Many good things have come from this forum, such as the infamous relationship between forumite's Azimio and PinKkFloyDd. Are you serious? Delete this nonsense. Aplomado - UTC 23:16, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. MarcoTolo 01:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Oh c'mon, the forum is up and the site will be too very shortly and do you have no sense of humour Aplomado? Seriously. CKY 00:08 11 April 2006 (UTC)
  • We do not have a sense of humor that we are aware of. And speedy delete per WP:VAIN. Danny Lilithborne 05:03, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete. This user does have a sense of humour (with a u!) but still insists that articles must be about notable subjects. The only notable matter here is that CKY removed the AfD tag from the article. -- RHaworth 08:58, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, doesn't appear to be a speedy (A7 applies to people or groups of people, this is a website), but see also WP:WEB. Stifle (talk) 17:21, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.146.67.190 (talk • contribs)
  • Comment LOL! I have no idea. If it could be demonstrated that Liquid Lurker is notable I would be happy to enter a keep vote in the spirit of assuming good faith, but I don't see anything that would justify my vote and I would end up looking like I am not acting in good faith. Likewise, I cannot enter a delete vote because it is possible this is notable. Not trying to disrupt anything, I only came here in part of my routine of checking up on new users (User:CKY) who I have welcomed to Wikipedia. --ElectricEye 08:41, 14 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.