Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Propel

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 REDIRECT to Propulsion method. Owen× ☎ 00:25, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Propel

• I didn't know about Wiktionary. Please delete. User:Jaculis

We already have an entry in Wiktionary. Delete dictdef. User:Zoe|^(talk) 03:17, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per nomination. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 03:18, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. PJM 03:42, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Propulsion method. Kappa 04:40, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
• Comment a good example of where the new deletion policy to allow blanking of pages could be used. Speedy delete it as author has blanked page. Zordrac 05:25, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
  • "New deletion policy?" What new deletion policy? User:Zoe|^(talk) 05:35, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Experimental_deletion - its funny that you wrote that in my talk page right below the comment which links to it. Look before you leap! Zordrac 05:38, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

• • That's silly. Author-blanked pages have been speedy delete candidates for ages and ages. It's not part of the experimental deletion procedure at all. I'll do the speedy delete. Geogre 17:10, 28 November 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.