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. Titoxd(?!?) 01:29, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
hoax. No relevant google hits, and ridiculous. — brighterorange (talk) 21:29, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Delete per nom. --Holderca1 22:40, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Delete. When people say there are already too many criteria for speedy deletion, I think of articles like this and cry. — HaelethTalk 23:41, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Delete. I think we need a speedy BJAODN proposal for things like this... --Aquillion 00:05, 25 October 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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.