Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William D. Baker

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was delete. Sjakkalle (Check!) 28 June 2005 09:04 (UTC)

[edit] William D. Baker

Vanity about some kid and his egg dropping device. --Canderson7 20:19, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete and, where I come from, this is {{nonsense}}.-Splash 20:40, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
• keep this article, in my opinion, is worth having because it is interesting. i would understand if it gets deleted due to lak-of-importance however this article does serve its purpose.(Vote by anon IP 67.80.40.235, same as last two edits to main article.)
• Speedy. Splash (talk · contribs) is right -- it's nonsense. Pburka 23:09, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • It is not, however, patent nonsense, which is text that is incomprehensible or meaningless, and not text that is merely silly. Only nonsense that is patent nonsense qualifies as {{nonsense}}. Uncle G 02:10, 2005 Jun 19 (UTC)
• Speedy delete. Crap. Postdlf 23:54, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

             ^owch^

• let it stay. it is not that bad to call it crap. And one does not have to be rude to get the piont across.(repeated vote by anon IP 67.80.40.235, author of article.-Splash 02:28, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC))

Comment, the anon IP in question has repeatedly removed the fact that it has voted repeatedly. It won't help, you know.-Splash 02:40, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Further, it has just removed the above comment repeatedly. Can we report him for vandalism now?-Splash 02:46, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

i did not mean to get ride of that part and i fixed it after i found i made that error and you keep earasing what i did to fix it which is here>>"let it stay<<<<repeted. It is not so bad were one should call it crap. And one does not have to be rude to get the piont across.(repeated vote by anon IP 67.80.40.235, author of article.-Splash 02:28, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)) "

• Strong delete agree with Candreson/Splash Jareth 02:51, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

sorry for bothering you guys but do you get paid for commenting on these articles

• Delete. As a side note, this is not patent nonsense and does not qualify as a candidate for speedy deletion under the current criteria. Kelly Martin 02:54, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Well i can see the votes are in and not one other person here wishes for this article to stay but let me add one thing people spend time on these articles so one should at lease give the common curtsy or reading it carefully and giving constructive criticism or just maybe a small complement along with the delete vote instead of just insulting the writer.

• Delete to BJAODN. It's silly nonsense. --Idont Havaname 04:09, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete nonsense but not funny enough for BJAODN. JamesBurns 04:38, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: Well, kid, this may be cold comfort, but I think it's a pretty funny account of a pretty funny experiment. I threw an egg off my high school's roof (two-story building) eons ago, with no safety devices, trying to prove chickens used to lay eggs while flying (I don't remember why I was trying to prove this). It landed safely, but it was thrown, not dropped, into grass. Other experiments from taller buildings onto harder ground resulted in Humpty Dumpty all over again. Your article isn't for Wikipedia, but you show plenty of promise in other areas. So don't be discouraged. Writers have to get used to being rejected. It doesn't mean what you've written is crap, even if you're told it is. That's only an opinion, not a proven fact. If you were to rewrite it to Wiki standards, it wouldn't be nearly as entertaining. And I think it's more than entertaining enough for BJAODN (which is not a diss in this case, at all). I say Delete, to go straight to BJAODN. --Mothperson 12:54, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, vanity. —tregoweth 11:31, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section.