Jump to content

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/archive May 2004

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Votes for deletion
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Chadloder (talk | contribs) at 03:50, 6 August 2003 (copyright infringements). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Add links to unwanted page titles to the list below so that other Wikipedians can have a chance to argue for and against the removal of the page. Please sign any suggestion for deletion (use four tildes, ~~~~, to sign with your user name and the current date).

  • If the page should be deleted, an administrator will do so, and the link will be removed from this page (it will show up on the Wikipedia:Deletion log).
  • If the page should not be deleted, someone will remove the link from this page. Page titles should stay listed for a minimum of a week before a decision is made. Note that obvious junk can be removed by admins at any time.

Please review deletion policy before adding to this page, and before performing deletions as an administrator. To challenge a decision made over a deletion, see Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion.

See also:




July 26

  • Bhagwan Das - possible copyright violation -- JeLuF 10:19 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Original submitter claims it isn't; see talk page. --Delirium 02:58, Aug 2, 2003 (UTC)
      • I think the claim is mistaken - see the talk page. --mav 07:17, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)



July 29

  • XMLHack - looks like self-promotion of a fairly obscure site. --Delirium 17:26, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
    • I'm not sure about obscure -- the Google test gives some 47,000 results (whether these are all referring to this site is a valid question). --bdesham 18:00, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
  • The Octopus Frets political poems -- First of all, this page redirects to the author, which is unnecessary, b/c if someone seached for it, and this page didn't exist, the page it currently redirects to would show up. Second, there are already 2 other similar redirects The Octopus Frets and Octopus Frets which also redirect to the same place. MB 20:53, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
    • The title of the book is The Octopus Frets: political poems. --Daniel C. Boyer 00:28, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree, total violation of redirect guidelines and meets deletion policy due to self-aggrandizing and advertizing nature. Delete all of these. Daniel Quinlan 22:15, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
      • Explain how these violate redirect guidelines. --Daniel C. Boyer 00:28, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)
        • They are self-aggrandizing, advertizing, and unnecessary, they also do not add to the user experience and only serve to clutter user search results. You added this redirect and it points to your own personal article. Daniel Quinlan 00:57, Jul 30, 2003 (UTC)
          • What you are saying is not the whole story. I did create this redirect, which in my opinion is appropriate (given, which I by no means argue, that an article on The Octopus Frets was appropriate at all) as it is the full title: The Octopus Frets: political poems. I did not do the subsequent merge which made it redirect to Daniel C. Boyer. --Daniel C. Boyer 19:29, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Zap it Tompagenet 17:59, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Keep this redirect. Deletion would break links, and serve no purpose. Martin 19:44, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete now that the content has been removed from the target article as unverifiable. Martin 22:14, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • You will be receiving a copy of The Octopus Frets: political poems, and thus be able to verify the information about it, soon. --Daniel C. Boyer 20:26, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • The Octopus Frets -- No content, just a redirect to authors page, and therefore completely useless. MB 20:53, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree, see above. Daniel Quinlan 22:15, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
    • Content in page history. Valid redirect. Deletion would break links, and serve no purpose. Keep. Martin 19:44, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete now that the content has been removed from the target article as unverifiable. Martin 22:14, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Echo computer graphic, Echo drawing, The Tailgating Spinster, Tailgating Spinster -- same as above. MB 20:53, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree. they aren't even stubs, just un-needed redirects. Quux 21:06, 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree. There could be an entire page related to votes for deletion of Daniel_C._Boyer material. Angela 21:45, 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree, see above. Daniel Quinlan 22:15, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
    • I disagree. By deleting these redirects, we lose page history. This page history has already proved useful to me. I feel that these are legitimate sub-topic redirects. Wikipedia search is disabled atm, but I doubt they would clutter search results. Therefore I would prefer to keep these redirects. Martin 22:46, 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)
      • I don't believe there is a page history for these particular pages. They were created as redirects in the first place, rather than being pages which were moved. Angela
        • At least some of them were merged. I know, because I merged them. :) Martin 19:36, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)
          • Well then, here is a compromise. We can use the move option to move the pages that have a history to User:Daniel C. Boyer/whatever, which will preserve the history, and then delete the others. Once they are moved, we can either delete them, or keep them as redirects (although I think they would be completely useless to keep. MB 20:29, Jul 30, 2003 (UTC)
            • MB's "compromise" would not reduce any of this alleged search result clutter, and would break links, thus making it the worst of all worlds. Broken links are evil. Don't create them - don't delete valid redirects. Martin 19:44, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
  • Donnelly
    • Pulling out of the above silliness to say... now a disambig page. Keep. Martin 19:44, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
  • I disagree with the "don't delete redirects" comments above. That may sometimes be applicable, but in this case, they were not created for an appropriate purpose. No useful links are being broken. They link only to this page and to Boyer's talk page. Angela 19:52, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

July 30

Keep all:
  1. Doug, the author of the articles, believes they should be kept in Wikipedia (see below)
Delete all:
  1. Daniel Quinlan wants all deleted: "Reciprocal System of Theory" has only 258 hits on Google, #1 is Wikipedia.
Keep main, delete rest:
  1. Stan recommended deletion of all but the main article.
  2. Robert Merkel recommended deletion of all but one article.
  3. User:Tim Starling -- keep the main article
  4. M123 all but one article should be deleted, the remaining article should be shorter and factual; wikipedia is not free webspace to lobby for a cause (as far as I know)
  5. Tb thinks there could be one RST page; the others should go. Especially things like Scalar motion and Gravitational motion which are likely to be very confusing to people who don't know it's all bunkum.
  6. Someone else - delete all articles but one, and be sure that one is clearly labeled with the NPOV equivalent of hooey. -- Someone else 07:08, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)
  7. Jwrosenzweig - keep the main article, delete the rest. The main article, once it's corrected for NPOV and has a good "critics of RST" section added, will be a nice way of demonstrating this particular belief for what it is--ambitious but scientifically unsound.
  8. Jake Nelson - Keep the main, delete the rest.
  9. Eloquence - Keep main, delete rest.
  10. mav - Keep the main RST article (in the shorter form Tim worked on), delete the rest
Other opinions and non-votes:
  1. Vicki Rosenzweig previously recommended deletion of Scalar motion, no opinion expressed on the others
  2. Marshman 18:43, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC) - Best way to cover these is to provide debunking information
  3. I have deleted the text of the Scalar Motion and Gravitational Motion articles, so they can be deleted without further ado. If you want to delete the whole shebang, please feel free to do so. I don't care anymore. Doug 16:48, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)

July 31

  • ARMBRUST - definition, really doesn't even come up to the level of a stub. - Hephaestos 07:10, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
  • Delete - in the wrong namespace (just created yesterday). --Delirium 16:27, Jul 31, 2003 (UTC)
  • Talk:Mercury - this whole discussion has been superceded by the Big Software change, and actually goes counter to the example for Mercury given in Wikipedia:Disambiguation. I particularly want it removed because it has lots of now redundant links, which caused lots of now redundant redirection pages which I am trying to clean up and get rid of (see above about Planet Mercury etc)RB-Ex-MrPolo 16:47, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • There is no reason to get rid of redirects. Search engines still have the redirects indexed. It would be very unprofessional to deliver a There is currently no text in this page-text to a user that just found us on google. -- JeLuF 08:46, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • KRYPTON programming language - old redirect page, nothing linked to it. Superceded by KRYPTON (programming language) and Krypton disambiguation page.RB-Ex-MrPolo 19:46, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Read the above policy please. Redirects are fine and should be kept and Krypton is an article. --mav 20:10, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • I have read both the deletion and dismabiguation policies and examples, and the changes I made are entrirely in line with those policies. There was no one meaning of Krypton that that stood out as a dominant meaning, hence the dismbiguation. Krypton is now a disambiguation page, with three sub-pages pointed to - KRYPTON (programming language), Krypton (element) and Krypton (planet). Putting brackets around the clarifiers is the standard method, so I effected a rename of KRYPTON programming language to KRYPTON(programming language). No content was changed or deleted. All links to these pages were cleaned up. So, what is the problem ?RB-Ex-MrPolo 16:39, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • The page KRYPTON programming language used to be the home of the article for about a year - it has been indexed and bookmarked by an unknown but probably large number of people. It stays. Furthermore it should be moved back to KRYPTON since neither the element or the planet are ever written as an acronym. I've already moved the element back and created a disambiguation block - my reasoning is on that article's talk page. --mav
  • List of active chat rooms - should be deleted or moved to the Wikipedia: namespace, as it seems to be about chatrooms Wikipedians use (and it's only got 1 entry so far...) Evercat 21:20, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • More likely a dishonest advertisement. Delete. -- Tim Starling 02:11, Aug 1, 2003 (UTC)
    • Page should be deleted. olivier 10:51, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Articles on psychoactive drugs:

August 1

  • There should be a new section for essays, since they can be very thoughtprovoking. (ie. good) Not the slightest crumb of insight or knowledge can be allowed to go lost. Lafayette 12:35, 1 Aug 2003 (EST)
    • No there shouldn't be. This is an encyclopedia. Evercat 02:39, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • Alright guys, Im a newbie. Sorry. I removed the offending page.
  • Ipiranga - in Portuguese, a copyright violation, and blanked by the original (and only) contributor. --Delirium 03:09, Aug 1, 2003 (UTC)
  • Excelsier -- It looks like a dictionary definitions, and it's listed on things to be moved to wikitionary, but why move this anywhere? It's not in the Oxford English Dictionary, it's not in Merriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate Dictionary, it looks like it's a misspelling of excelsior with a made-up definition. I'm listing it on VfD. -- Someone else 06:14, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • All of its Google hits (which again reminded me of many people's poor spelling) are typos for excelsior. Delete. -- Jake 12:02, 2003 Aug 3 (UTC)
    • Redirected to correct spelling. Keep redirect. Martin
  • Kev Beach -- personal autobiography Cordyph 12:50, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Kev Beach -- certainly not an autobiography, this biography has been provided for reference purposes only newuser 21:07, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • ...says the creator of the article. If this is not an autobiography, it is a biography of an absolutely unimportant person - delete. - Cordyph 21:19, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
        • I, of course, leave that for your ultimate consideration - but I would not have added the biography if I thought it to be completely unimportant to the website audience -- in any case, you know my vote (to which, it goes without saying, I am equally entitled): maintain newuser 23:14, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
          • It would help if the article actually explained why this person is supposed to be interesting... —Paul A 14:40, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • 16 Google hits, of which few if any are relevant. Delete. -- Evercat 13:52, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • I agree - delete. Non-famous person. --mav 07:38, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  1. 15:30, 1 Aug 2003 Cyclothymia Disorder (top)
  2. 15:27, 1 Aug 2003 Childhood Disorders
  3. 15:23, 1 Aug 2003 Bulimia Nervosa
  4. 15:21, 1 Aug 2003 Avoidant Personality Disorder
  5. 15:19, 1 Aug 2003 Attention-Deficit Disorder (ADD, ADHD) (top)
  6. 15:15, 1 Aug 2003 Antisocial Personality Disorder (top)
  7. 15:14, 1 Aug 2003 Alcohol/Substance Abuse
  8. 15:09, 1 Aug 2003 Adjustment Disorder (top)
  9. 15:07, 1 Aug 2003 Anxiety Disorders
  10. 14:36, 1 Aug 2003 Mental Illness (An Overview)
Careful, some of these may have a previous history.
No need to delete these (At least the ADD one) -- many are probably dupes, & can just be converted to redirects. -- llywrch 18:43, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Medications - neither encyclopedic nor a list of redirects; this looks like someone's vague notes toward an article, at best. Vicki Rosenzweig 20:50, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • It's been made into a redirect, so should now stay. Theresa knott 06:26, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • User:Amntony is uploading images and HTML. His user page states I have difficulty getting a "free" homepage on the net! So I figure out this might be a nice place for my "little" htmls. His contributions so far include;
    .... [snip talk] ....
    • I have just deleted these and numerous others. No need for a VfD wait: Wikipedia is not a free web-hosting service. If we let this happen, freeloaders will descend on us in large numbers once they realise it is possible. Perhaps we should disallow .html / .htm as uploaded file extensions. -- The Anome 00:09, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • Agreed, .htm as a file extension draws nothing but problem. --Menchi 00:34, Aug 2, 2003 (UTC)
  • Katherine Jacobson for all the same reasons as the deletion of Daniel C. Boyer. Angela 23:27, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • It seems it's a redir now. So problem solved? --Menchi 23:37, Aug 1, 2003 (UTC)
    • Not solved, delete. Allowing any autobiographical content and tributes to random people are bound to destroy Wikipedia. Daniel Quinlan 00:04, Aug 2, 2003 (UTC)
      • This has happened many times before. A new user comes along and, not realising our policies against self-promotion, creates an article about themselves. There must be a hundred redirects like this to the user namespace. I say keep them all. -- Tim Starling 08:07, Aug 2, 2003 (UTC)
        • Other than my concern that this still gives a benefit to people who self-promote, my aethetic objection is that these redirects still show up in search results which is non-optimal. There really needs to be a way to phase out redirects. The redirect talk page has more on this. Daniel Quinlan 08:34, Aug 2, 2003 (UTC)
    • I created it; you may delete it with extreme prejudice and without delay. The whole page is patent nonsense without a shred of truth. I created it for rhetorical reasons during the discussion regarding Daniel C. Boyer. While many saw it as a me-too-I-can-have-a-biography article, it was in fact written to demonstrate a point about unverifiable assertions. Kat 14:49, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • I really question this kind of conduct, in which false information is deliberately added to Wikipedia, however noble the intentions may be. --Daniel C. Boyer 14:18, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • I don't see the problem with deleting the rest of them too, they're just legacy items. - Hephaestos 17:18, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
        • If you mean deleting all redirects to user namespace, that's a very bad idea, as it would break hundreds of links on Talk pages. (Of course, the best thing would be to use an automated process to update all these links; then the redirects could be deleted.) --Zundark 20:41, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Copyright violations? These seem to be lifted straight off websites (the "top" tag gives it away) I'm not sure, maybe someone else can check it out
Elavil
Buspar
Serzone
Dysprosia 23:31, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
They appear to be from http://www.healthyplace.com/medications/amitriptyline.htm Angela 23:45, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Adapin
Tricyclics are also cut-and-paste from healthyplace.com (which has an explicit copyright notice), I deleted those but without The Anome's neat paragraphs. I don't think this user has done anything other than cut-and-pastes of copyrighted material. Vicki Rosenzweig 23:50, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)

August 2

  • Stile Project advertising jimfbleak 06:34, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • I think it could have some encyclopedic value. It is linked to in Shock site. What do others think?
      • Should get more info in the article. Stile Project is infamous, and is most certainly due mention in any encyclopedia that has discussion of shock sites and the evolution of the 'net. -- Jake 12:06, 2003 Aug 3 (UTC)
    • irrelevant. Wikipedia is not Yahoo. Kosebamse 13:07, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Should stay. Actually was nominated for a Webby award, which gives it some level of credibility and worthiness. SpeakerFTD 02:57, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Dissident - dictionary definition (and not even a very good one). --Delirium 18:11, Aug 2, 2003 (UTC)
    • fixed it up somewhat, still needs more content, however - SimonP 19:19, Aug 2, 2003 (UTC)
    • This will be a super article. Do not delete. See Talk:Dissident. Rednblu 09:39, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)


  • Lafontaine - a diambig page for the surname "Lafontaine" -- I don't think we should start to create diambig lists for surnames. -- till we *) 18:50, Aug 2, 2003 (UTC)
    • I created the page, mostly because it was listed on the requested pages. I think it has for a long time been wikipedia practice, if not policy, to make disambig pages for commonly linked to surnames. e.g. we already have ones like Wesley, Strauss, Schumann, Russell, and Scarlatti, and other pages like Baker and Miller that are mostly lists of people with the surname. - SimonP 19:19, Aug 2, 2003 (UTC)
    • It's fine as disamb. Quite useful. Sometimes ppl just know of a famous person by their surname (Shakespeare). --Menchi 21:06, Aug 2, 2003 (UTC)
      • I'd keep it. -- Jake 12:06, 2003 Aug 3 (UTC)
  • International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution From Ships. This article has been here for some time, but it doesn't seem particularly encyclopedic. RickK 19:58, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree that's it's not encylopedic, however it does contain some useful info. If anyone wants to expand it into a proper stub in the future, trhat info would be useful. The article needs to rewritten as a poroper stub not deleted Theresa knott 20:54, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • There are similar other imports from the CIA Factbook, some wikified, check Environmental agreements -- User:Docu
  • Symphony No. 10 (Mahler). A stub that ends in the middle of a sentence. RickK 20:27, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • I would delete now. Seems like garbage. --Jiang
    • I turned it into a stub. Not a very good stub, mind you, but I don't think it needs to be deleted.

August 3

  • Battle of Fort Steadman. Angela 04:49, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • I noticed that it contained a slight distortion of facts: Lee defeating Grant and imposing 20000 casualties... I tried to rewrite and make it a stub but American history is not my speciality. Muriel Gottrop 07:09, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • This article is a bit worrying, I think it might be better to just delete it and let someone else start over ... unless someone really wants to check over all of the facts in detail. Daniel Quinlan 09:08, Aug 4, 2003 (UTC)
  • fuzzy math and there you go again. Just two phrases by two presidents of USA. Delete or group it under one related articles. --Wshun
    • Del. --Menchi 07:23, Aug 3, 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete. Daniel Quinlan 09:08, Aug 4, 2003 (UTC)
    • But see this article, for instance. I think "fuzzy math" has an existence beyond its "presidential" one. --Daniel C. Boyer 20:26, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • It is simply poor math that many feels fuzzy. Not really of historial importance on its own. Delete! --wshun 00:27, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Microsoft.com
    • weird artistic critique of Microsoft's website; seems to have been added to "prove" a point. I wish people would stop doing that... -- Stephen Gilbert 08:29, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • agreed, seems fixed now with a redirect Daniel Quinlan 09:08, Aug 4, 2003 (UTC)
  • Fumocy - seems to be some obscure person's personal idea, introduced on a mailing list in October 2002.
    • Delete, original research by obscure person. Daniel Quinlan 09:25, Aug 3, 2003 (UTC)
  • Isoroku Yamamoto's sleeping giant quote - somewhat unverifiable analysis, this is interesting research into the veracity of the quote, but it seems to be more appropriate as the beginning of a snopes.com piece rather than a Wikipedia article. Daniel Quinlan 09:47, Aug 3, 2003 (UTC)
  • Image:Internalblades.PNG - image is irrelevant; not in use and only applicable to the Tesla turbine article; another superior gaphic of the telsa turbine is being used there now. reddi 14:22, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Jarkis and all related pages (Internet Service in Liberia Liam Hart) and links added to other pages. It appears to be a bit of a ruse. Mintguy 23:44, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)~
    • I agree. No Google results for Jarkis + Liberia or for Jarkis + Hart. Angela
    • Also Ringboll created by anon IP with contributions by above users. Mintguy 23:57, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Is this a new policy first deleting the pages and afterwards voting for their deletion? Even if the article in question seems ridiculous (who can judge?!), I'm afraid this is not the correct procedure. Someone might consider those articles stubs and ntend to elaborate on them. --KF 00:20, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Nothing has been deleted. And AFAIAA pages have always been listed here that might potentially be serious articles if rewritten but a currently hold garbage. Sometime ago an IP created stubs for numerous British comedians which had nothing more than the name and DOB. They were all deleted pretty swiftly. No-one seemed to complain at that time. Mintguy 00:37, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • That's right: the articles themselves haven't been deleted: only their previous content, which can be retrieved by any user. -- The Anome 00:39, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Great. But why don't you also do the same with, say, Day of Defeat or Mathematics education? By the way, not everyone who does not fully agree is complaining. --KF 00:51, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • KF. This is what this page is for; deciding whether or not a page should be deleted. What's wrong with Day of Defeat apart from the fact that it could use some work? Mathematics education looks like a bit of a non-article to me and it could probably be deleted or redirected. At least these do have some valid content. The Internet Service in Liberia was a pure fantasy created by vandals. If you want to write a proper article to save it from deletion, nothing is stopping you. Mintguy 02:05, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • I think what KF is getting at is the article should not be blanked unless there is a suspected copyright violation. Instead just add a header to the top of the article saying that it has been added to this page as per the deletion policy. The examples that KF gave are articles listed on this page that have not been blanked. -- Popsracer 02:53, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • This page should go. Vancouverguy 02:43, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Jarkis may appear to all of you as a page that should be delete. But none of you fact live in my country. Nothing may be what it appears to be. I do not support the delete of this page. maybe it is because you dislike Liberians because we no rich people like you peoples. so that's how you want to treat us? our life is hard already and I just found a good website with Internet provide from Jarkis. But in my first some contribution you decide to delete? where are the human rights? Sorry if I said too much. I oppose the deletion of this site Marshallharsh 19:18, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete. Include also Robinson Roman Leonardo Taylor Moore. --Wik 20:18, Aug 4, 2003 (UTC)

August 4

  • Surrealist Subversions - A stubby book review. Kat 00:53, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • 60% of that page is a contributor list..... --Menchi 01:10, Aug 4, 2003 (UTC)
    • It being a stub is no reason to delete it (stubs often turn into better things), nor is the fact that it's an article about a book. The contributors list seems an obvious thing to include in an article about a book with multiple authors. Looks like a reasonable article to me. --Camembert
    • I think it gets deleted because an encyclopedia article doesn't really add anything here: the book is not influential, hard to find, and doesn't have much to reason to exist as an article other than the fact that one of the book's contributors created the article, seemingly to promote it/himself. Daniel Quinlan 09:01, Aug 4, 2003 (UTC)
      • That you are going to the length of suggesting that Surrealist Subversions be deleted shows a possible bias against surrealism, or at least the not-officially-approved surrealism that has fluorished in the United States since 1966. And others are even suggesting that Franklin Rosemont be deleted! Is it going to be the official policy of Wikipedia that The Surrealist Movement in the United States (this article is currently a POV rant with far-out and inaccurate ideas such as that surrealism is not connected to automatism) is going to be ignored? --Daniel C. Boyer 14:18, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • We have articles on lots of obscure topics - it's one of the Wikipedia's strengths. We shouldn't judge the worth of articles based on who created them. There's nothing wrong with this article. --Camembert
  • VOD - copyvio. --Delirium 09:29, Aug 4, 2003 (UTC)
    • and a duplicate, too; now redirected to "video on demand". The user who created "VOD" is a recent anon user, 61.214.131.46 -- can someone please check out their other 10 or so contributions for copyvios, please, I've got to go to work. -- The Anome 09:35, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
      • That was the only new article they created. The rest were minor additions or modifications to existing pages that all seem okay. --Delirium 09:43, Aug 4, 2003 (UTC)
  • Panatom - minor web-design firm; little information in the one-sentence article, and not many google hits. --Delirium 17:23, Aug 4, 2003 (UTC)
  • Tourism in Canada - only a listing of Canada's provinces and territories, nothing on tourism. -- JeLuF 19:44, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
The page should be deleted, definitely. Marshallharsh 20:06, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Louvois - inappropriate redirect. Louvois is also a Communes of the Marne district. -- JeLuF 20:27, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • The redirect to François Michel le Tellier, marquis de Louvois is not necessarily inappropriate. A Google search for "Louvois" yields many links to pages about the Marquis de Louvois (some of which refer to him only as Louvois) and almost none about the Commune of Louvois, which is a village of less than 400 people.[2] Chances are that someone looking for an article about Louvois is looking for the person rather than the place. -- Cjmnyc 05:47, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • At any rate turning it into a disambig is much preferable to deletion. - Hephaestos 05:48, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree with Hephaestos. --Daniel C. Boyer 20:26, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Nneuhs - advertising. - Hephaestos 21:23, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Just delete it. --Menchi 02:32, Aug 5, 2003 (UTC)
    • Please zap this. Totally NPOV advert Tompagenet 16:02, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Tulum - possible copyright infringement. == sannse 21:28, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • User:Bloodwitch - content by anonymous IP is apparently the result of a mistake and has been copied elsewhere (in Talk:Cate Tiernan), user Bloodwitch's contributions list is empty so that user probably doesn't even exist. An admin should check that before deletion. --FvdP 23:35, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)

August 5

  • Charles Butch Watson. Currently blank, this article has been edited off and on for several days now by several anonymous users. RickK 02:44, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I'd say keep that one. Redirects that cover up for misspellings are always good; I've got a friend who's a legasthenic (and a math student) and greatly appreciates things like this. -- Schnee 21:27, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Provenance - dictionary definition, and a copyright violation. --Delirium 03:31, Aug 5, 2003 (UTC)
Agree on the dictionary aspect. --Chadloder 03:30, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Ifraa - had reconsidered and do not wish to have content here.
  • Theatre troupe, copyright viol and content not encyclopedic even if the anon user holds the copyright.
  • Xine is a straight copy of http://xinehq.de/index.php/about Even if it's not a copyvio, we don't need it here. Someone could write a reasonable stub on this, rather than a plug for Xine, or it can go. Vicki Rosenzweig 16:29, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Done; it's now a stub. -- Merphant 23:13, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Jimmy Somerville - I'm not sure what's the status of this. G-man blanked it out for copyvio so I inserted the boilerplate text. The discussion page implies that it wasn't cleared, but Mav restored it several months ago citing it was. --Jiang 21:47, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • I've completely re-written it anyway, no need to delete G-Man 22:22, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Jen Besemer - Only 2 websites link to her personal webpage. Only her site and this site mention Last Sun (see search results). Same with The Year of Wood. Same with What is Born except one more site (a review site) mentions it. This review site in itself is not very popular (only 32 results from google search). Based on all of this, and it's stub quality (it will never be more than a stub), I vote for deletion. MB 22:07, Aug 5, 2003 (UTC)
  • Ronnie Burk - First hit is wikipedia on google search. Can not find any sites talkig about him in particular (there are many Ronnie Burk's). Search for his book returns only wikipedia article as a result (see google search). This will never be more than a stub. MB 22:15, Aug 5, 2003 (UTC)
  • Charles Radcliffe - Search for his name "Charles Jeremy St John Radcliffe" returns no results. There are a total of 17 mentions of the magazine he edited, "Heatwave". 7 results when search for references concering him and his citation in On the Poverty of Student Life. Only 24 mentions of him regarding surrealism (compaired to around 257,000 results when searching for surrealism). Search for articles relating him to the friends magazine returns 1 result. This will never be more than a stub. MB 22:27, Aug 5, 2003 (UTC)
  • Dan Georgiakis - Search for "Dan Georgiakis" returns only 9 results. This will never be more than a stub. MB 23:09, Aug 5, 2003 (UTC)
  • global - basically an overly long dictionary entry. This entry will always be about the word itself, rather than about something more worthy of an encyclopedia article like globalization. Chadloder 03:34, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • The Russian-American Company - possible copyright infringement. I have contacted the author of the website from which the text was lifted. In the meantime the page has been noted and the text moved to the talk page. Chadloder 03:50, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Padania - possible copyright infringement. I have contacted the author of the website from which the text was lifted. In the meantime the page has been noted and the text moved to the talk page. Chadloder 03:50, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/archive_May_2004&oldid=1247931"