Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lol the internet

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. – ugen64 01:11, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lol the internet

Articles says it's not notable. Delete as forum vanity.--InShaneee 16:33, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Non-notable. Vanity. Delete -- The Anome 16:38, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as forumcruft. Hedley 16:47, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Forumcruft. Nestea 17:14, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Pure vanity and lame. Sarg 18:52, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable. Thue | talk 20:35, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete not notable - DavidWBrooks 20:37, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, advertising/vanity. ("Nothing really gets done" could imply an attack too). Mgm|^(talk) 21:02, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete for reasons already listed. Borders on patent nonsense too. --Idont Havaname 21:14, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. And here I thought that it would be about the 4chan meme. humblefool® 02:03, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete not noteable/unimportant/ bad advertising No Clue 05:11, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable vanity entry --Wetman 05:12, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Updated page on June 8th do not delete
  • Unsigned comment by User:24.82.3.215. — JIP | Talk 05:14, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Above comment was vandalised by the same user, who changed the IP address. — JIP | Talk 12:56, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, forum vanity. — JIP | Talk 05:14, 9 Jun 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.