Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super Greg

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 and put more editors on cleanup. - ulayiti (talk) 11:35, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Super Greg

Not notable Kerowyn 08:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete TheRingess 08:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Seems to be a notable Internet meme. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-06 09:49Z
• Delete how is this notable? what a waste of space. Bartimaeus 09:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, absolutely non-notable. Whats more, the fact that this stayed on clean-up for over a year without being AfDed suggests to me that clean-up tags don't work. Jdcooper 14:14, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment We need more bold editors in the cleanup section. I think most people have their pet topics and are hesitant to deal with anything outside of those topics. Kerowyn 03:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
    • I would like to think that I am one of those, its very rewarding, I have learnt an awful lot about Maltese nobility, amongst other things, in the recent weeks since I have been going through clean-up articles. It should be some kind of WikiProject maybe? Jdcooper 03:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Quarl. Many thousands of G hits. -- JJay 00:15, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Not a notable meme. As comparison, all your base are belong to us gets 479,000 Google hits, while this gets about 20,000. JoaoRicardo^talk 20:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete fictcruft. Stifle 01:24, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
• keep. a legit internet meme. space is not an issue. Kingturtle 09:04, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
• comment since when did wikipedia become the archive of every irrelevant piece of crap in history. How about this articles next Places Hugh Grant has been to the toilet or Types of stones most likely to get caught in your shoes. Bartimaeus 10:13, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I suppose the argument would be that what is irrelevant piece of crap to John is fascinating and relevant knowledge to Harry. Its the job of consensus to get a happy medium. I am an inclusionist, generally, but you have to have limits. "Super Greg" is past the limit. Jdcooper 14:28, 12 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.