This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. Coffee 10:12, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
delete, not encyclopedic, not notable, vanity, ad. You name it, it's got it. Mmmbeer 03:53, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Article says it all: absolutely no redeeming value whatsoever Boojum 04:45, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Not-notable and makes no claim as to being so. --GraemeL(talk) 16:22, 20 August 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.