Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ToSeek

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. - Mailer Diablo 15:40, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ToSeek

I am pretty sure this article is not encyclopedic nor is it likely to become that way anytime soon. It doesn't seem to work with web guidelines and much of the article appears to be original research. --ScienceApologist 17:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Strong Delete. It's non sense at the core. (and a vanity entry too) Equendil Talk 19:03, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete. wikipediatrix 20:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete The term does nothing to assert notability per WP:NEO guidelines, and the person described in the article deosn't appear to meet WP:BIO guidelines. It doesn't appear to fit any of the CSD guidelines, though. NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 23:43, 25 September 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.