Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slave whipping blasphemy
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 was delete. Sr13 is almost Singularity 01:46, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Slave whipping blasphemy
Non-notable band, with one self-produced album. Was speedied as CSD A7, but the creator objected, crying political censorship, so I am throwing it to the wider community. He has provided some links at Talk:Slave whipping blasphemy to claim notability, however imho these are all forum posts and listings pages that do not actually demonstrate notability. Stormie 03:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following related pages - the self-produced album and a demo by the band.
- Niggerbitch 666 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
- A Kall To Whips (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
- Delete all three. The irony of it being "black" metal notwithstanding, we aren't an advertising service. --Fire Star 火星 03:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete all. Fails WP:BAND. Flyguy649 talk contribs 04:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete all. not notable. Oysterguitarist 05:14, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete all per WP:BAND. Bart133 (t) (c) 16:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete without prejudice: "I" am more notable than these guys. There's nothing out there for any of the above-mentioned articles. Sidatio 17:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per above. Mkdwtalk 20:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- Kindly consult with the caster of a vote before you go passing judgment on what they've got to say. I'm sorry if you didn't get the joke, and I've changed the vote in the spirit of civility. Thanks in advance for your attention to the matter. Sidatio 21:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- For starters, most incidents labelled as vandalism do not require the consultation of that person when reverting their edits. If you want your comments to be taken seriously and left alone, then keep to something we can use. If you want to joke about something, I suggest the Uncyclopedia. AfD's have a very simple method of being used: Comment, Speedy Delete, Delete, Keep, Strong Keep or Delete. If someone leaves their vote as "Kill all with massive amounts of fire" that is vandalism, even if its a joke. "I am more notable than these guys. There's nothing out there for any of the above-mentioned articles" does not provide any means to a legitimate vote. AfD's are tasks that need to be done and making them complicated with votes we cannot consider does not help. If you're going to take the fact that I removed your comment so seriously, and then remove my comment, put a new one back, restore my comment, leave a complaint here, and post a message on my talk page -- then you should reconsider your own comments if you want to be taken seriously. Sarcasm and jokes are fine, but I have to say in this case there was almost no distinction between a whimsical joke in the middle of a vote and the most common vandalism we see here at AfD's. Thanks for your time. Mkdwtalk 22:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- Kindly consult with the caster of a vote before you go passing judgment on what they've got to say. I'm sorry if you didn't get the joke, and I've changed the vote in the spirit of civility. Thanks in advance for your attention to the matter. Sidatio 21:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per above. ~ João Do Rio 00:57, 3 August 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.
