Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UrO processor

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. WjBscribe 03:40, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] UrO processor

UrO processor (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

There does not appear to be such a thing. (No Google or Google Scholar hits). Hoax? At any rate Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. — Coren (talk) 01:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

  • 0 relevant GHits, but it's entirely possible that UrO could stand for something. shoy 01:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:CRYSTAL and nom. —Signed by KoЯnfan71 My Talk Sign Here! 01:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete If this hasn't come out yet, I don't see how it can be notable. Any references will be speculatory at best. WP:CRYSTAL. Hersfold (t/a/c) 01:24, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete until it's notable. 2011 is way-away. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 01:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete pure cruft. Marlith T/C 02:51, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as per nom. R. S. Shaw 03:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:CRYSTAL - if it's not going to be on sale til 2011 (that's if it exists at all), then it's not worth having now.--Voxpuppet (talk • contribs) 05:04, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete -- Article contains no links and does not seem to be a real thing -- Imperator3733 06:24, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
  • it may well still be an existing processor though it does not seem to be one... i believe that i may have heard of a new processor that peeks between that of a nano and that of a pico but i have not heard any details...Koishii1234 18:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)koishii1234
    — Koishii1234 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Don't Deletehe may have a point... the processors page may not be very reliable but that does not mean the processor itself does not exist... in fact i too have heard many rumors of such a processor but the point is that just because you've never heard of something dosent mean its not real... and if you intelligant people have yet to hear of a UrO processor than theres not much chance that ANYONE else has... there for to delete it from a site that is constantly being turned to for knowledge is the same as deleting knowledge itself... if you could PROVE that it does not exist that would be one thing however from what your saying it sounds only like you want it gone simply because YOU havent heard of it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kentatengoku (talk • contribs) 18:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
    — Kentatengoku (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
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.