Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ottawa Creek B-5

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. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 14:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ottawa Creek B-5

I think this is speediable, but I'm bringing it here for the entertainment value. Extremely complete entry describing a perfectly ordinary (and non-notable) apartment, its perfectly ordinary (and non-notable) undergrad residents, and their lifestyle. Nicely done, but in no way encyclopedic. Nominator votes BJAODN and delete. bikeable (talk) 18:43, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete Non-notable hoax page. -- (aeropagitica) UK 18:49, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete I am frequently asked by fellow classmates to give tours of the apartment for possible place to live (they literally ask if they can come over and "check the place out"), and i thought this would be an easier way for them get to know the apartment without having to give tours all the time. This is not advertising in anyway, as i would be doing a favor for my fellow classmates by making this. Also wanted to make my first Wikipedia Article. Besides its obviously not taking up too much space and besides being reffered to the page by me, it will remain unknown to the average Wikipedia User. I know it probably goes against Wikipedia code, but this remaining on here would be a great referance for me to use. Wikipedia is supposed to be the sum of all human knowledge, and this is verifiable useful information that many people will find useful. Please Do not Delete, its not hurting anything. Chrisboven 20:29, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
    • As soon as you find yourself using the "But it's not taking up too much space!" and "It's not hurting anything!" arguments, you know that you are arguing the case for mis-using Wikipedia as a free wiki host. Wikipedia is not a free wiki host. It is an encyclopaedia. If you want to advertise your apartment to potential occupants the place to do so is on your own web site. If you want some ideas for your first encyclopaedia article, please go to Wikipedia:Requested articles. Uncle G 17:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Chrisboven, I removed all the unverifiable info (aka everything beyond existence). As said, we can't advertise an apartment for you. I suggest you put "{{db|mistakenly created}}" at the top of the article, and we'll avoid a pointless 5-day debate here. You're very welcome to edit other articles in Wikipedia, but you won't be able to add any unverfiable information to any article (not even this one, not even for the few days it has left). --Rob 17:28, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
      • I restored Rob's vote, which had been deleted by 67.162.196.106, who also made the unsigned vote below. 67.162.196.106, please do not alter other people's votes; it is considered WP:Vandalism. bikeable (talk) 21:46, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
        • Don't Delete the article yet, it has not been settled Rob —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.162.196.106 (talk • contribs)
          • I only removed the unverifiable part. Feel free to add back anything where you can cite a reliable source. --Rob 21:50, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Rob, i hope you also plan on deleting the thousands of sections on articles without citings here in WIkipedia, not just this one Chrisboven 00:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
    • I would love to remove thousands of uncited sections from thousands of articles. However, time constraints and popular opinion prevent me from doing that. Instead, whenever I find something with no sources *and* it's not possible to ever find any sources, and it's therefore *inherently* unverifiable, then yes, I do remove the section. I have removed a *lot* of sections, from a lot of articles. Occasionally, those sections are added back when sources are found, but usually they stay gone. --Rob 01:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, per nom Tom Harrison (talk) 19:58, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete All the information is true and useful :—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.162.196.106 (talk • contribs)
    • This user has already voted. Skeezix1000 13:22, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 15:50, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete for obvious triviality and unverifiability. Perhaps userify some of it. --Rob 16:33, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • BJAODN :) Reductio ad absurdum of Wikipedia's level of detail. Gave me a good chuckle - please preserve this somewhere. - Haukur 17:01, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • It also tells us the name of the chair in the apartment's living area.

    There is no speedy deletion criterion that covers this article. However, as the nominator explains, and as the article's author indeed confirms, this article is original research and unverifiable. It is a novel description of a place, created by a Wikipedia editor directly in Wikipedia from firsthand knowledge that readers do not have access to from any sources (let alone reliable ones) outside of Wikipedia. It is also an attempt to mis-use Wikipedia as a free wiki host. Delete. Uncle G 17:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete Reyk 22:23, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete; this is not what Wikipedia is for. Bearcat 22:48, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, per nom. Skeezix1000 13:22, 5 January 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.