Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Page 23

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. Mailer Diablo 05:00, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page 23

Delete. nn, unencyclopaedic, and generated a "huh?" from me when I first read it. Grutness...wha? 05:03, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete, omgwtfcruft --Deville (Talk) 05:14, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable advertising campaign --TBC??? ??? ??? 05:16, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. Esquizombi 05:20, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - Total cruft. --lightdarkness (talk) 05:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, unencyclopedic. Just another ad scanned from a magazine. --Kinu t/c 06:36, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, not sure why this would be interesting... Just pick up a Maxim. GrandmasterkaImage:Blend Flag.jpgImpart wisdom 07:47, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Hehe, pretty strange article. Staxringold 16:51, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. No relevant Google hits other than Wikipedia and mirrors. The article lacks a clear indication of why the subject was notable. --Metropolitan90 17:56, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. One page in one magazine is clearly not notable enough. JIP | Talk 18:18, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per above --Khoikhoi 22:36, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. My goodness, this is useless information. ProhibitOnions 01:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete: If it could establish infamous that would be one thing, but the article doesn't even describe the advert, just where it appeared! Peter Grey 04:32, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Notable publication goof --Masssiveego 08:16, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment. The article doesn't say it was a publication goof, and I don't have reason to believe that it was. Could you elaborate? --Metropolitan90 08:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
  • delete fnord, would be nice to see the advertisement to make a better judgement, fnord see what fnord they were selling. Or some other source. Otherwise fnord, notability not established Roodog2k 15:37, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
    • comment in other words, what were they REALLY advertising.... Condom ad in PC POWER PLAY magazine? hmmm.... Roodog2k 15:39, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
      • but seriously this should be deleted. It smacks either of non notablity or a hoax. Roodog2k 15:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, cruft. ¡Dustimagic! (T/C) 05:24, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete omg, did you see page 22...er cruft Nigelthefish 16:24, 21 March 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.