Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milano Crew

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 (discounting sockpuppets). Robert T | @ | C 21:36, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Milano Crew

Non-notable Newgrounds group. Optichan 14:57, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. It gets 64 Google hits, but a good bit of even that modest number are unrelated, a Land's End catalog page for a "Milano Crew Sweater", for example. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:07, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Hmm, it says to me 207 hits... odd. Lord Of Ketchup 20:37, October 26 2005
  • Delete this poorly written, self-promotional Newcruft. —HorsePunchKid→龜 20:16, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep I think it should stay because we're just a small group of people, yes, but we're still getting bigger. Besides, it's just 1 article, and I update it everyday with more things to say. AND, many of the MIlano Crew members are regulars at wikipedia and come here every day. I think you should respect us... maybe? Lord Of Ketchup 5:39, October 25 2005
  • Keep Because seriously... This is the internet. What would it matter if one more NG crew had a page on wikipedia? And besides, Milano Crew is better than Everything. REDMONGOOSE 5:39, October 25 2005
    • Above comment was made by anomymous user 161.6.228.104 (talk · contribs) --Optichan 17:06, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep this. Because its the best!!! Adevade 2:25, October 26 2005
    • Above comment was made by anomymous user 81.229.166.18 (talk · contribs) --Optichan 17:06, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Unencylopedic. Members voting above admit the group is not notable. Chick Bowen 22:43, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
    • If you say we're unencylopedic, then that defeats the whole purpose of this site. Newgrounds.com doesnt deserve to be in an encyclopedia, none of this stuff does, its just for fun, things you might not know about. Maybe you should realize that just because we don;t have 2000 hits on google, that we're still notable. We are one of the 5 "main" groups of ng, i think that counts for something. Lord Of Ketchup 20:32, October 26 2005
  • Keep this. The group is notable on newgrounds, I'm sure if you ask on the bbs most of the people will say they know us. Also, I don't think deleting it for that isn't a good reason, I think this page give good information about something that some people would like to know. That's all, just keep it, I bet the users who marked it as not useful just wanted some promotion.. Jitan Forcier 20:35, October 26 2005
    • Above comment was made by 70.80.119.112 (talk · contribs) -- Chick Bowen 01:19, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • KeepANOTHER ARGUMENT. If the Star Syndicate gets a page, why shouldn't we? I mean, they don't even exist anymore! Lord Of Ketchup 20:40, October 26 2005
    • That page has been deleted multiple times. See Special:Undelete/Star Syndicate. And feel free to look around for articles on the Clock Crew, Lock Legion, and Glock Group. --Optichan 01:26, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
      • Well, that page hasnt been deleted or recommended for deletion yet, AND it has a picture of a Ku Klux Klan member with a swatstika! That offends me greatly, and I don't know what kind of place your running here, but if it involves racist discrimination, then I don't want to be a part of it. Lord Of Ketchup 22:23, 27 October 2005
    • Please don't vote more than once. Chick Bowen 01:19, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Shut the hell up ChickBowen. NOTREDMONGOOSE 01:19, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
      • Preceding comment made by 161.6.228.104 (talk · contribs) and is indeed the same person as REDMONGOOSE above. --Optichan 14:27, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete with hate this sock infected AFD --JAranda | watz sup 15:03, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete The only people who seem interested in this article wrote it like an advisement for themselves. Seano1 22:47, 29 October 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.