Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naked flip

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 was Delete--JForget 00:15, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Naked flip

Naked flip (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. Article is apparent original research, with no sources (reliable or not) cited. The article further admits the subject is known only to a very small group of people, i.e. it has no global significance at all. —C.Fred (talk) 16:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 16:31, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete- simply rubbish. Sushant gupta 16:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - No notability asserted. No sources. Cogswobbletalk 16:48, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, Sushant gupta & stupid YouTube video. --Evb-wiki 17:13, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete -- it's borderline A7, but it does assert notability, sorta...--SarekOfVulcan 18:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete seems to be just some trick a kid and his friends made up... Bjewiki 21:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete too bad WP:NFT is not a speedy criteria. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, fails the everything test. RFerreira 08:24, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Garbage. THE KING 12:38, 23 October 2007 (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.