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 Lyellin (talk | contribs) at 04:28, 25 February 2004. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Template:Communitypage Please read and understand the Wikipedia deletion policy before editing this page. Explain your reasoning for every page you list here, even if you think it is obvious. See Wikipedia:Deletion policy polls for polls on current deletion issues.

Boilerplate

Please do not forget to add a boilerplate deletion notice, to any candidate page that does not already have one. (Putting {{msg:Vfd}} at the top of the page adds one automatically.)

Subpages

copyright violations -- images -- speedy deletions -- redirects -- Cleanup -- translations

Deletion guidelines -- deletion log -- archived delete debates -- Votes for undeletion -- blankpages -- shortpages -- move to Wiktionary -- Bad jokes -- pages needing attention -- m:deletionism -- m:deletion management redesign -- maintaining this page -- inclusion dispute -- Deletion policy polls -- Old cases

Votes in progress

Ongoing discussions

February 16-19

  • Pulchritudinous - dictdef, nothing more. Fuzheado 23:44, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Somebody has now turned this into a redirect to Beauty, but I'm not sure that's a good idea, since anybody presented with "Beauty (redirected from Pulchritudinous)" would be none the wiser as to its meaning. If it were likely to come up in other articles, it should be left as a stub. Given that I doubt that, I vote delete. - IMSoP 00:00, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • I have a problem with the redirect. 'Pulchitrude' may be defined as 'physical beauty and appeal,' but in the last few decades it has taken on a connotation of, shall we say, a much earthier kind of appeal. There are some, me for instance, who while not criticising the fleshier, more sensual message the word now carries, may not necessarily see it as pertaining to beauty. Best bet - send it off to Wikt & delete Denni 20:31, 2004 Feb 17 (UTC)
    • Merge with beauty then redirect, or keep as stub. Anthony DiPierro 17:37, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge with beauty & redirect. Wile E. Heresiarch 00:49, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge, redirect, AND transwiki? Fennec 03:41, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Transwiki to wiktionary, but do not merge with "beauty". There is no encyclopedic content in here at all, just a definition. Wikipedia is neither a dictionary nor a thesaurus, so beauty does not need this. --Delirium 05:57, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)
    • Wiktionary Rossami 04:15, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Moved to Wiktionary:Pulchritudinous. Delete. Angela. 21:21, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
  • Claremont Resort Boycott - This page needs major revision or total deletion. Flockmeal 04:34, Feb 18, 2004 (UTC)
    • If someone would like to write an article on the Claremont Resort, then this can be incoporated. Delete is not improved. --Jiang
    • Delete. Stub on a current affair never likely to be worthy of an article, written by an anonymous user probably connected to the dispute. If it ever becomes sufficiently famous, write the article then. Andrewa 09:26, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Probably not important; rewrite if it happens to become so (unlikely). Andre Engels 17:51, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Move to Claremont Resort. Or is Wikipedia finished and we can stop accepting stubs? Anthony DiPierro 21:43, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, for reasons given. The place is lousy, by the way, a bad joke on a respected local institution; and the long-running labor dispute may be directly related to its badness; but it's not Wikipedia material. Dandrake 23:14, Feb 18, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep if it can be expanded, otherwise delete. But best bet if it cannot be expanded is to merge with the resort. --Daniel C. Boyer 15:54, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Verifiable and seems to be "big enough". BL 09:33, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. It's a copyvio from [1] anyway. Angela. 21:32, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, unimportant and a copy vio. Maximus Rex 00:33, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • List of collectors - This "list" only contains two people. Either add more and revise the article, or delete. -Flockmeal 21:28, Feb 18, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - a list lacking a list - Texture 21:40, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Dumb. Anthony DiPierro 23:02, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. If there were actually a lot of collectors listed it could be worth keeping, but not with only 2 people. Jacob1207 00:13, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Pointless - Graham  :) 12:15, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge with collecting before deleting. Jay 19:10, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. There are now five items and the page can grow endlessly. BL 09:33, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Impossible list to maintain. Redirect to collecting or similar article. Rossami 04:17, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete because of no interest whatsoever. Herbee 04:30, 2004 Feb 23 (UTC)
    • Keep. Valid list. I've added a section on stamps. Link with more articles and make it grow. Jay 08:16, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Inane. Will we have List of quilters next? Davodd 00:42, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
    • It's no worse than the rest of the lists and now contains more than two people, so keep. Angela. 21:37, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)

February 20

  • Stratocracy - dictionary definition that is already included in the only article referencing it. - Texture 17:43, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Definition was wrong. Fixed. New article, but recommend Wiktionary if it's not substantially expanded. Rossami 18:03, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Needs content, otherwise wiktionary and delete -- Graham  :) 18:57, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • John Talignani - September 11th victim. →Raul654 19:33, Feb 20, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Anthony DiPierro 20:59, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 21:00, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Denni 21:23, 2004 Feb 20 (UTC)
    • Delete. Sir Paul 21:39, Feb 20, 2004 (UTC)
    • Transfer to 9/11 wiki Secretlondon 22:13, Feb 20, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. --Wik 01:04, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)
    • Transfer to 9/11 wiki. Elf 01:35, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Everyking 02:54, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Move to 9/11 wiki. Wile E. Heresiarch 09:41, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. BL 10:22, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Transwiki and delete. Bearcat 10:28, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • 9/11 wiki -- Graham  :) 18:57, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete unless it can be verified he did something more notable than dying. Davodd 22:56, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, nonfamous, but move to 9/11 "wikimorial". Fuzheado
    • Transwiki and delete. --Imran 17:08, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Move to Sep11 wiki and delete. Angela. 22:16, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
    • Move to the sep11 wiki and delete. Not notable except for death. Maximus Rex 00:36, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • move and delete. --Jiang
  • Live sex show -- a one-liner with no activity since June, 2003. Jay 22:17, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Make it a redirect to Sex worker. RedWolf 06:28, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Redirect to Sex worker is not appropriate. Better would be to sex show but that article doesn't exist. Lets just wait until someone knowledgeable about live sex shows comes around. BL 10:32, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Don't move to Wiktionary. Herbee 04:36, 2004 Feb 23 (UTC)
    • Keep. Move to "needs work" page. Davodd 22:34, Feb 23, 2004 (UTC)
  • Spliceome - a freshly invented term, as far a I can tell. (44 google hits, of which most are misspellings of spliceosome or about a database named SpliceOme) Stewart Adcock 22:34, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • I have heard it used in the bioinformatics literature. I suggest that spliceome redirect to spliceosome, and incorporate that material into a new section in spliceosome. --Lexor|Talk 23:41, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Biot-Savart law - text has nothing to do with the Biot-Savart law]] Fuzheado 23:18, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • I've redirected it to Biot-Savart's Law. Maximus Rex 23:42, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • I switched them the other way, since the preferred usage is tends to be without the apostrophe. -- Decumanus 08:57, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • List on redirects for deletion as copy/paste move which needs to be fixed. Anthony DiPierro 16:22, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

February 21

  • Who Wants to Marry Mr. Jones? - Zero Google hits. There are other dubious edits by this contributor. Evercat 00:03, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, agree. Fuzheado 00:09, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Sir Paul 00:10, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)
    • Should be looked into and expanded. - Arthur George Carrick 01:53, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Should be kept if expanded. --Daniel C. Boyer 18:30, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Delete, unless someone can proove that it actually exists. Saul Taylor 03:48, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: if verified, delete because it's insignificant, otherwise, because it's a fabrication. Wile E. Heresiarch 09:57, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • If it does turn out to be real (which seems highely unlikely) then I think we should keep it because I don't see why we shouldn't have articles on ever tv show ever broadcast. Saul Taylor 16:11, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete unless verifiable. Anthony DiPierro 16:24, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Useless sub-stub at present. Andrewa 15:54, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Confrontation - dictionary definition, nothing more. Fuzheado 00:09, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Should be redirected to conflict or argument or something similar. Mintguy (T) 00:17, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Too ambiguous to redirect. Anthony DiPierro 16:25, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Only a (useless) definition. Jacob1207 21:25, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep; this could be revised into an article on human response to conflict. -Branddobbe 22:58, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. What branddobbe said + how other species react to confrontations + witness confrontations. BL 10:37, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: Dictionary definition. Animals that have unique confrontational displays will have them listed in the animals site. Oberiko 19:56, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Wiktionary Rossami 04:37, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - move to wiktionary - Texture 00:07, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Mildcompetence - Gibberish KJ 03:02, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, unless heres a space on Wikitonary for made up rubish, in which case move there. Saul Taylor 03:48, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: no such term. Wile E. Heresiarch 09:57, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Dictionary definition of some runtogether words. --Daniel C. Boyer 20:34, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Interestingly, the user who created it did it with the edit summary "keep" -- sounds to me like he knew it'd be posted here. Bearcat 18:01, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Every google hit on the word comes from the address of one website. Average Earthman 19:05, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. This is nonsensical. Oberiko 19:56, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Nonsense word. Rossami 04:37, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Didiot - derogatory name for one obscure Windows advocate. Pakaran. 04:00, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Edit and move to "Laura DiDio". she exists and is somewhat famous/infamous in some geek circles--Mishac 08:51, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Move to Laura DiDio. Wile E. Heresiarch 09:57, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Move to Laura Didio (who still has a blank page :) --Palapala 10:07, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Started page and merged. --Palapala 13:32, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge with Laura DiDio and redirect. Anthony DiPierro 16:27, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • 4futureengineers.com - seems to be self-promotion.... was an advertisement. removed contact information. --Hemanshu 10:13, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete both this page and the redirect page Ragini Communications Inc. Cedars 12:50, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Wiki is not paper. Anthony DiPierro 16:31, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Neither is it the Yellow Pages advertising phone book. Delete. Tempshill 20:13, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, page and redirect. Sir Paul 18:22, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete page and redirect. Branddobbe 22:58, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete page and redirect. Elf-friend 23:20, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Wikipeda is not paper. BL 10:37, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. With the contact info stripped, it's now a blank article, and there's no remotely encyclopedic content that could conceivably be added. Bearcat 17:18, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. No bearing on, well, anything.
    • Delete, Wiki is not an attic. Fuzheado 02:24, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: advert. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:49, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - advert - Texture 00:07, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • attoparsec - Mainly listed to prevent bad precedence from being created, I don't think this particular prefix/unit combination warrants its own article. The brief mention in parsec is enough IMO. -- Dissident 22:32, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • No vote. I just rewrote it, emphasizing its special status as a jocularity and therefore (hopefully) making it clear that it's not a precedent for individual article on yoctoparsecs, exaparsecs, etc. Assuming that it really is in jocular use by programmers--I just googled on it and The Jargon File and other sources aren't terribly convincing about this--it's worth preserving, though if there is a suitable article on nerd humor it could be moved there. I think I would argue that if it has an entry in FOLDOC and in the Jargon File, there's a prima facie case for it to have an entry in Wikipedia. Dpbsmith 23:53, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. In its present form, a perfectly good item on a piece of nerd humor. Dandrake 00:09, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. It's a joke with a long tradition (pre-web times...) --Palapala 09:54, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. BL 10:43, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep; it's got a long tradition. Psychonaut 14:05, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Relocate, probably under the (as yet non-existant) nerd humour page. Oberiko 19:56, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Bible atrocities and the associated redirect Bible attrocities. Irredeemably POV, even with my intro, and serves no purpose. Meelar 22:38, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, same reasons as above. -Branddobbe 22:58, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)
    • Apparent copyvio, see [http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/atrocity.shtml]. Move discussion to copyvio page? Damn, that's one good list, though. Tom Paine would have enjoyed it. Dpbsmith 00:01, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • All this and a copyright infringement too? Barely worth saying explicitly, Delete. Dandrake 00:13, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete -- Graham  :) 20:40, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Rossami 04:41, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep: interesting topic; can be made suitably NPOV. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:49, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Comment: IMO it's a good topic. Always likely to be controversial, but can still be NPOVed and will get many interested readers. I'm not completely happy with the title but can't think of a better one. Of course the copyvio must be fixed. Andrewa 12:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Greenie Bus - is this something we need here? Even if we decide to keep it, do we need its schedule? RickK 22:39, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, but drop the schedules -- just list the routes, maybe. -- Seth Ilys 22:53, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Wiki is not paper. Saul Taylor 01:33, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Seems okay to me. Why not have schedules? They are useful to those who use these buses. Optim 02:26, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. I can agree with Optim that bus schedules are useful, but Wikipedia isn't where anybody's going to go looking for one when they need it. Bearcat 10:03, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Awesome article. Keep. BL 10:43, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, or at least trim significantly. This isn't encyclopedic in the sense that people are going to be looking for information on it here. Psychonaut 14:05, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • keep. we shouldnt penalize the article for being detailed.--Mishac 16:41, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • No, we should penalize it for being absolutely irrelevant to anybody besides the students at one university. Bearcat 21:06, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Davodd 22:39, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: an out of date bus schedule (which this will certainly be in a year) is worse than useless. Disclaimer: I don't own a car. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:49, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • One plus one not encyclopedic Anthony DiPierro 23:40, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, but maybe retitle, move, or merge with something else. Does have some interesting info. -- J. Antley 17:48, 21 Feb 2004 (CST)
    • Keep; agree with DarkFantasy. The contents are worthy of the encyclopedia, but wouldn't suffer if integrated somewhere. Dandrake 00:16, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. It's a phrase that everyone use with a long and proud history. BL 10:43, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete; this is inappropriately titled. Move/merge content to some article dealing with addition or uses of the plus sign. Psychonaut 14:05, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Not addition; the entry shows clearly that this expression is not necessarily addition in any normal sense. And plus sign is a bit of a red herring: it's nothing but a redirect to addition—which reduces the problem to the previous case. Dandrake 04:56, Feb 23, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Pointless here. Everyking 20:42, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. We will have n-squared combinations otherwise. I agree with suggestion for the info going into the pages for one and plus. And binary etc. No need for the collection of the info in one place. Paul Beardsell 10:46, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 00:07, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

February 22

  • Kenneth_O'Keefe A self written article that is more about his personal political view then anything else. Also of note is the relative insignificance of this person (quick google search of the name displays several others with same name, didn't see this one). Oberiko 16:27, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, though it should be slightly rewritten. His organising the human shields (or part therein), whatever one might think of it, renders him significant enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. --Daniel C. Boyer 19:39, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, definitely. Everyking 20:42, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)?
    • Delete - self-written articles are inherently POV - btw, did I mention that I invented the Internet? - Texture 00:04, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Israeli terrorism (see Talk:Palestinian terrorism)
    -- Added to list to make parallelism explicit. +sj+ 02:16, 2004 Feb 22 (UTC)
    • So what article does this one duplicate (which was the main reason for listing P.t.)? Keep, but the name needs changing. --Zero 02:33, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Should be moved to Violence against Palestinians in parallel with V. against Israel.
      • A separate discussion of terrorism in the Middle East over time can cover terrorism by Jewish groups before Israel was founded, against Britain and other occupying forces; by Arab groups throughout the century, against Britain, France, and other occupying forces; and by groups across the subcontinent against rival groups, neighboring nations, &c. -- probably the largest category of 'terrorist' violence (but the least likely to arounse international notice). +sj+ 09:06, 2004 Feb 22 (UTC)
    • Relocate Oberiko 17:11, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • The word terrorism should not be in the title. Move to another title. Optim 09:32, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • ...or in the rest of the article. Everyking 23:50, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • William Ware Theiss Page about a person not notable for anything, presumably by a family member, user who created this has not made any other contributions. Saul Taylor 02:20, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • If it's the same guy, he was the costume designer on Star Trek. Keep and add relevant data (no pun intended). Lee M 02:31, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Keep this version. RickK 03:03, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
        • Now that the article has relevant content, I change my vote to Keep. Saul Taylor 03:31, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep; he's famous within his field. Psychonaut 14:05, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. I'd heard of him about 30 years ago, and his 3 Academy Award nominations show he's known within his field. -- Arwel 14:25, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. This person's information could easily be added to a list of supporting people for the Star Trek series. Oberiko 17:06, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Famous enough. DJ Clayworth 03:08, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Chuckles insginficant and obscure, can't grow.--Mishac 11:26, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Nope. Chuckles, like Lord British, is the pseudonym of an Origin Systems founder and programmer heavily involved with the Ultima series, and also the name of a character that has appeared in most of the games. I just expanded the article significantly, and vote to keep it. —Psychonaut 11:44, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Change my vote. Keep as rewritten by Psychonaut. Nice work psycho :)--Mishac 12:26, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete and Move. Unless this article can be expanded further, it should be compiled with a list of other video game pseudonym's, or under the Ultima entry.Oberiko 17:11, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep -- Graham  :) 19:33, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • BOOK (magazine)-ad?
    • Delete: Surely this could be relocated to a list of published magazines. Unless greatly expanded, I don't see where it serves much purpose. Oberiko 16:58, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete -- Graham  :) 19:33, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Top O'the Bruce - obscure saying about obscure hill in obscure place. Fuzheado 16:31, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)]
    • Redirect to Mt Ruapehu.........which is only obscure when the cloud is down on it; otherwise it dominates the North Island of New Zealand. ping 06:44, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep if expandable, ootherwise delete.--Mishac 16:44, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Far too obscure, can't see how this can expand -- Graham  :) 19:33, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. The word "obviously" in the sentence "So, obviously, if you're going up the road and it's the end of the road, you're at the Top o' the Bruce" waves a red flag suggesting that it isn't even a well-known local name for the place, but a personal coinage inserted for the amusement of the author. Dpbsmith 15:10, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep (if expanded). Is indeed well known in NZ and by international snowfield visitors. A southern hemisphere landmark may be considered obscure by people in the northern hemisphere. And vice versa -- take a look at the entry for Waterloo, Louisiana. I wouldn't suggest Waterloo be zapped and hope The Bruce isn't either. We're not going to run out of paper here, and if either entry informs someone, some day, then that's why we are here. Moriori 22:23, Feb 23, 2004 (UTC)
      • Then re-write the article, because as it stands it's not very good -- Graham  :) 21:55, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
        • Point taken Graham. I considered dropping everything and doing a bit of expansion, but needs must elsewhere. If it's still around when I come back to it, then I'll have a go. If it's gone, then I'll be suggesting a cull of many other stubs as well, e.g. Waterloo, Louisiana. ): Moriori 22:20, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
  • Lynn Marple - seems to have done nothing of note besides being a wife and mother. I don't see the potential for meaningful encyclopedic expansion. - Seth Ilys 16:38, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete this and Sarah Marple-Cantrell too. IT's sad, but unless it's wel known news, its not encyclopaedic.--Mishac 16:48, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete this and Sarah Marple-Cantrell. This is not a site for people to put up personal information and self-webpages, especially those who have little to make them noteworthy in the large-scheme of things.Oberiko 17:11, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. I've already made my feelings known about Sarah Marple-Cantrell. I'm ambivalent about Cyrus Cantrell, while we're at it, but there's enough information there that I could potentially be swayed by the argument that he's relevant beyond being the father of a girl who committed suicide, if anybody wants to make that case. Bearcat 17:13, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete -- Graham  :) 19:29, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Del. -- Minesweeper 20:39, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. More famous than 2147483647. Anthony DiPierro 20:45, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge with Sarah Marple-Cantrell and redirect. Optim 21:53, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • <slightly off-topic> Seems to me that Sarah (and her associated relatives) are exactly what Wikimorial is supposed to be for.</slightly> Jwrosenzweig 20:29, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Lime Juice - Orphan. I cannot find any evidence that this album exists. Google, Amazon, CDDB all turn up nothing.--Minesweeper 20:39, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Unless it can be linked to a particular band then delete. Even if it can it ought to go to Lime Juice (album) anyway to avoid confusion. Vfd tag added. -- Graham  :) 20:43, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete unless verifiable. An idiot in his bathrobe? Anthony DiPierro 22:58, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: unverified. probable fabrication. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:58, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Heart Lake Secondary School - has nothing of note besides the fact that it's a high school in a suburb of Toronto. I don't see how this stub can be turned into a non-trivial, non-stub, NPOV article. Darkcore 22:08, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Not famous. Rdash 05:24, Feb 23, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. A high school is noteworthy enough to be included here. Everyking 06:12, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Not relevant. (Disclosure: I'm a Torontonian and I still don't think Toronto high schools warrant inclusion.) Bearcat 08:36, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. A high school is noteworthy enough to be included here. Anthony DiPierro 03:26, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Articles on significant buildings are noteworthy. But needs to be updated to conform to Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools. Davodd 06:52, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
  • Turner Fenton Secondary School - again, another high school in suburban Toronto. Same as above. Darkcore 22:08, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • If the fact that it's Canada's only campus-based high school was expanded on, it could make a good article. Keep. Rdash 05:24, Feb 23, 2004 (UTC)
      • Campus-based only means that the school is a merger of two other schools. There's not enough there, even, to expand upon. Darkcore 17:12, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Everyking 06:14, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Not relevant. (Disclosure: see above.) Bearcat 08:36, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Articles on significant buildings are noteworthy. But needs to be updated to conform to Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools. Davodd 06:52, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
  • Richard Genovese - irrelevant surrealist. --Wik 22:22, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Why is he irrelevant? Mark Richards 22:26, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Because I voted for the pages undeletion and Wik doesn't like me. Anthony DiPierro 22:57, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Google search finds no evidence of serious recognition. Just self-promotion, and even much less of that than, for example, Daniel C. Boyer, and we don't have an article on him either. --Wik 22:55, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Non-notable surrealist artist whose reason for having a page here is that he associated with prolific wikipedia contributor, Daniel C. Boyer. Maximus Rex 01:09, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Kill all surrealists.—Eloquence
      • The anti-surrealist bias that keeps purging relevant articles on surrealism from Wikipedia can now be seen in much clearer focus. Who can contradict me on this point now? --Daniel C. Boyer 16:02, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. I guess we can just keep listing articles here until they finally get deleted? No vote until I see some verification. IHL. HAND. Anthony DiPierro 04:06, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Everyking 04:19, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: irrelevant, personal promotion. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:58, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • comment only: This page is now being vandalized by someone claiming to be Richard Genovese. Anthony DiPierro 15:20, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Susan Finlayson - Nonfamous, possibly fictional. Google search ("Susan Finlayson" farming) turns up three hits, none related to this. Fuzheado 23:55, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • I added the VfD header. Delete. I can't find anything when Googling "Murie Center" and Finlayson. RickK 00:12, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Susan Finlayson was a real Stanford student. She worked at the Murie Center one summer. Could be a professor. IP is in Pleasanton, California. Possibly an autobiography, or biography by a student. Web page at http://www.susfin.com/. Seems to be checking out. Keep and list on cleanup first. Anthony DiPierro 01:35, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • "Temp - TMS" does not seem to be "professor." Why should any university student get an article? --Jiang
        • Ah, you're right about the professor thing. As for why should any university student get an article, why not? Also, she most likely has graduated by now, so she isn't a university student at all. Anthony DiPierro 04:03, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. --Jiang
    • Delete: nobody in particular. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:58, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

February 23

  • Catherine Gordon. Any reason why this person needs to be kept as a separate page? RickK 01:39, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Either expand or redirect to George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron Byron Saul Taylor 01:59, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Any reason why this person shouldn't be kept as a separate page? Anthony DiPierro 04:48, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep: literary biography. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Her son's biography is a literary biography. She has no such claim to fame. Why can't this info be merged into his page? RickK 01:36, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
        • Byron's ancestors, on both sides, were interesting people, one might say charitably. Here's what an online essay [2] says about Catherine: "Byron's mother was a Scotswoman, Catherine Gordon of Gight, the last descendant of a line of lawless Scottish lairds. After her husband died (Byron was then three), she brought up her son in near-poverty in Aberdeen, where he was indoctrinated with the Calvinistic morality of Scottish Presbyterianism. Mrs. Byron was an ill-educated and almost pathologically irascible woman who nevertheless had an abiding love for her son; they fought violently when together, but corresponded affectionately enough when apart, until her death in 1811." There's not much in the Catherine Gordon article now, but it's clear to me there is room for a lot more material. Wile E. Heresiarch 14:31, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete and merge, doesn't seem like much else can be said about her. Oberiko 12:50, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete and Merge AY 05:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge and delete (that order makes more sense :-) ) Andre Engels 13:09, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Fixed. How about merge and redirect? I just did that, and it didn't require any sysop superpowers, or any listing on VfD, or any votes, and surely took less time the previous votes above. Fixed! -- Toby Bartels 22:06, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Francisco Rivera Rosa - Looks like a vanity page. Non-famous. Google turns up eight hits. Darkcore 02:29, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: personal promotion, nobody in particular. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Oberiko 12:50, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • He was written up in Islands magazine, for whatever that's worth. --Daniel C. Boyer 15:58, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • When? What issue? Where can I get a hold of a copy of this magazine? Anthony DiPierro 17:44, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete AY 05:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Arfé - Tie this in with FRR. "Arfé is the creation of artworks by staining with coffee." Seems to be a Daniel C. Boyer special. Anthony DiPierro 04:53, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • There seems to be a level of dishonesty here. Francisco Rivera Rosa invented Arfé, or at least invented the name for it, to the best of my knowledge, and I have never made or attempted to make one. It is as nothing to do with me as anything could be. --Daniel C. Boyer 15:58, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • [3] Arfe: "A term coined by Francisco Rivera Rosa to describe his 'paintings' with coffee on paper (derived from art + café = Arfé) Daniel C. Boyer, Artist"
      • [4] You also are the one who created this stub. Anthony DiPierro 17:47, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
        • So what? I submitted information I knew about to one reference site, where it was presumably confirmed and included; I started an article on the same information I knew about in Wikipedia. I don't understand what your point is. --Daniel C. Boyer 19:54, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
          • You're the one who claimed dishonesty. Anthony DiPierro 21:22, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: irrelevant, idiosyncratic. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, add blurb about this to some page on Art techiniques Oberiko 12:50, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • I agree AY 05:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Still doubting on these two; lightly tempted towards keep. However, we certainly do not need both pages. If they are not going to be deleted, merge the two. Andre Engels 13:09, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Land Ordinance of 1787 is a mistake. The content describes the Northwest Ordinance. There is a separate act called the Land Ordinance of 1785 that this may be confused with. Bkonrad 03:21, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Relocate. Oberiko 12:50, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep as redir. Davodd 00:51, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
    • Google shows the term is being used, though not often. Keep as redirect, unless someone can make a case that it's confusing. Andre Engels 13:09, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • I'm OK with a redirect, but in full nit-picking mode I'd like to point out that a careful review of Google search results for "Land Ordinance of 1787" actually shows that the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 is NOT referred as the "Land Ordinance" It is sometimes listed as the "Ordinance of 1787" and it sometime appears in the same list with the separate legislation "Land Ordinance of 1785" (which so far as I can tell is only referenced in Public Land Survey System. If and when the 1785 article is written, there might be a need to make this a disambiguation page. Till then, I'm OK with this simply redirecting to Northwest Ordinance.Bkonrad 18:32, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • List of gelato parlors - too wide and general. Fuzheado
    • Delete. Its too bad. I'd like to know a good gelato parlor around here :)--Mishac 07:29, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. One item is not a list -- Graham  :) 11:23, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Oberiko 12:50, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. AY 05:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Wikipedia is not the yellow pages. Andre Engels 13:09, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Hetto-Iberians. First there was an article called Hetto-Iberian (no ‘s’). This attracted much negative attention for two reasons. First, it stated as fact that Basque and Etruscan are related to certain other languages. It is well known that although numerous attempts have been made to link Basque and Etruscan to various languages, standard scholarship holds that neither is related to any known language. Second, many who knew something about linguistics had never encountered the term “Hetto-Iberian”, and a Google search for the term turns up almost nothing. The eventual outcome of this criticism was that the article was moved to Caucasian peoples and substantially modified. Progress. But now an article with all the original problems has been put at Hetto-Iberians. This should be deleted. Josh Cherry 03:43, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Or rather, give it a week to get modified so that it does not lend the status of Wikipedia, such as it is, to what is plainly a splinter theory. If nobody cares enough to do that, it's no loss when deleted. Dandrake 05:12, Feb 23, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete this and Caucasian peoples as now written. RickK 05:17, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: fantasy. Another quality product from our good time buddy User:Zestauferov. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Everyking 06:14, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete -- Graham  :) 11:23, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete AY 05:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Quattuordecillion - dictionary definition Anthony DiPierro 06:16, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Neutral. Could improve. Delete if not improve in 7 days -- Graham  :) 11:14, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Relocate to Wiktionary. Oberiko 12:50, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete or Redirect. Being out of context, this doesn't make much sense. Would make much more sense as part of a numbers table (like in Webster's Dict). Main difference is the usage of "milliard" in Europe opposite to "billion" in the States to begin with. --Palapala 20:11, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Numbers table is at List of numbers. Anthony DiPierro 22:19, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
        • Thanks, Anthony. Both entries are there, in the context, where they belong. So why a seperate article? --Palapala 08:44, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Yea, could improve?!! AY 05:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Toronto Women's Sword - looks like advertising. Google says 40 hits. If they're at all important, someone say so and I'll clean it up. Isomorphic 07:00, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. This is an instance of a sword team which is of no significance, and is misleading, as the long sword tradition originates in north of England. There is no original tradition in North America. Brian Kelly (creator of the original Sword_dance) page 18:22, 2004 Feb 23 (GMT)
    • Delete, local. Mrdice 09:31, 2004 Feb 23 (UTC)
    • Anything with a contact phone number on it has got to be an advert. Delete -- Graham  :) 11:14, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete Oberiko 12:50, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Vfd is not a cleanup request. Anthony DiPierro 14:24, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete AY 05:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. No information on it that would make it special enough to deserve its own page. Andre Engels 13:09, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Argument_against_any_specific_God Although I am an atheist myself, an article with this title cannot exist without being POV. Atheist rant. Mrdice 09:21, 2004 Feb 23 (UTC)
    • POV Atheist rant. Delete. Optim 09:35, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete rant -- Graham  :) 11:14, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Take any relevant information and paste on Atheism or Agnosticism if possible. Oberiko 12:50, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Original research. Anthony DiPierro 14:28, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Original...er....research. DJ Clayworth 14:40, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. POV rant. Seth Mahoney 19:41, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Move to Argument from inconsistent revelations, fix, and keep. We have pages for each of several Arguments for the existence of God, and a page on Arguments against the existence of God as well. This article needs help to be sure, but it contains the gist of that argument. -- Smerdis of Tlön 20:06, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Smerdis/Ihcoyc is right -- keep. It definitely needs an overhaul, but I can envision this article outlaying the argument (and responses of course) in NPOV fashion. Jwrosenzweig 20:39, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, Smerdis is wrong, Argument from inconsistent revelations is original "research" (more like poorly thought out musings), and, incidentilly, is pure bunk ;) If you would like to change the policy on original research go talk to Jimbo. Sam Spade 20:56, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Keep. I don't see how this counts as original research. There is no actual research in it. Secretlondon 22:48, Feb 23, 2004 (UTC)
    • Fix, but if not fixed, delete. Definitely not NPOV (and i say this as a militant athiest). Morwen 23:00, Feb 23, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Everyking 23:50, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete but if not fixed AY 05:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Can be made suitably NPOV. WP has Anselm's ontological argument, it can have the counter-arguments as well. Wile E. Heresiarch 14:39, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • This has nothing to do with Anselm's argument, which is appropriate for inclusion in WP for historical reasons. Were it established that this argument was a rebuttal to Anselm's by some prominent philosopher or something similar, it might be appropriate for inclusion with sufficient NPOVing, but this isn't the case. Seth Mahoney 18:23, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
        • You're absolutely right, it's irrelevant for me to bring Anselm into this. I still believe the page can be made suitably NPOV. Wile E. Heresiarch 02:56, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Nominal category Now an orphan; its IP creator 142.58.101.24 misspelled it, linked it from Noun (either confusing a grammatical concept with a group-dynamics one, or camouflaging something else) and otherwise edited it with such poor quality that i assume it to be utter nonsense until shown otherwise. --Jerzy 20:04, 2004 Feb 23 (UTC)
  • Carbo - Unwikified, POV page about "the most important members in Roman History" by anonymous user with only this page in his contrib history. --Flockmeal 21:23, Feb 23, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, it's just the article from the 1911 Britannica...we have plenty of those. It needs Wikification of course, but don't delete it. (This should be on cleanup instead of VfD.) Adam Bishop 22:05, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Its just talking about an ancient Roman family, some of whose members are important, some not. Its not like its saying "this is the most important Roman family in history." Seth Mahoney 18:38, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, has some relevance. Oberiko
  • List of numbers that are always odd - I'm not even sure what this article is supposed to mean. It doesn't seem encyclopedic and I don't see how this can be expanded. Maybe the bit about Atlanta's FM radio stations can be merged into FM radio? Darkcore 22:06, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • I have added a suitable discussion to the article on FM radio. It's simple arithmetic, based on an 0.2 MHz-wide channel. The FM band starts at 88.0 MHz so the lowest is 88.0-88.2 MHz so its center frequency--the nominal number you set the dial to--is 88.1 MHz, and they follow at 0.2 MHz upward, QED... those outside the U.S., do whatever you think appropriate... Dpbsmith 02:44, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Junk. Delete. FM radio stuff is FCC regulation that is not followed in other countries.Davodd 22:19, Feb 23, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Everyking 23:50, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. AY 05:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete or merge with some other article where odd numbers are discussed. Optim 05:39, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Trivial and no sign it could ever become substantial. seglea 07:44, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Collection of trivialities. Andre Engels 13:09, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. DJ Clayworth 16:01, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 21:21, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Patent nonsense. --Faradn 00:32, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Nothing special about Atlanta, and the rest of the stuff isn't worth listing. -phma 01:24, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. All the text is gone now.
    • Delete. Some of the valid entries could be added to even and odd numbers. --Minesweeper 02:29, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. —Noldoaran (Talk) 04:03, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)
  • Doom Builder - "Popular" program used by maybe 50 people. Fredrik 22:08, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Anthony DiPierro 22:16, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • There are tens of thousands of programs out there with 50 users. Should there be articles about all of them? What about websites with 50 visitors? (possible exaggeration) Fredrik 22:28, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • 636 google hits. Secretlondon 22:51, Feb 23, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. AY 05:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep or merge with Doom because we cannot know how many people are using it and because many people are interested in Doom. Optim 05:37, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep and merge with Doom. Toby W 14:47, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. DJ Clayworth 16:01, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Make a mention under Doom itself, or a list of Doom Support programs and have the name link to an external site. Oberiko

February 24

  • Tenths digit-doesn't make any sense. See above discussion of List of numbers that are always odd. Saul Taylor 01:50, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Rename the article (e.g. Tenths digit (radio) and/or have it re-direct to FM Radio, which has this exact tidbit of information down towards the end of the article. The article is correct but a) misleading as titled, since there are plenty of other things that use the number immediately after the decimal point in a specific way and b) a one-trick pony, since all the author wants to point out is that FM stations in the US are given a 0.2MHz bandwidth assigned by some obscure channel number system by the FCC. If it were fleshed out more (with explanations of how this works in Europe, on AM Radio, whatever) I'd be more inclined to keep it around. Rev3rend 15:15, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. (BTW, the reason why FM Radio now has the exact tidbit of information is that I put it yesterday...) The phrase "tenths digit" is not any kind of meme, is not associated with FM radio or anything else, and the fact that in the Atlanta area and/or the U.S. it is always an odd number is not worth an entire article. Dpbsmith 15:56, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 16:11, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Poorly named and should just have information in article on FM radio, or specifically FM radio in the US. Cool Hand Luke 18:30, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. --Minesweeper 02:29, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge with FM Radio and redirect. Don't delete, as you will lose the edit history. Anthony DiPierro 03:57, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Incorporation - US- and even Delaware-centric. If it's kept it needs to be expanded to include the rest of the world. Otherwise, make it a dictionary stub and move it to Wiktionary. RickK 01:59, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Not every article needs to be about the entire world. Expand or move to Incorporation in the US. Anthony DiPierro 03:17, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Although some content is redundant with corporation (and apparently adapted from an sd or something using personal pronouns), I think this is a respectable start that could contain more information relevent to actual incorporation in the future. Also, Delaware corporations are rather significant in the US, and several notable multinationals are Delaware corporations. Cool Hand Luke 04:16, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, could improve -- Graham  :) 13:06, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Andre Engels 13:18, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep - Texture 16:11, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Very important. jengod 00:24, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)
  • Altaf Fatima - It may be beautiful, but it says nothing. Darkcore 05:08, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Probably a copyright violation. From the talk page: Well, according to the Internet, Altaf Fatima is an Urdu poet who was born in 1929, so I doubt that her works are in the public domain. RickK 05:38, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC) - Optim 06:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Not a vote. I replaced the poem with a stub article, and I moved the poem to the talk page. 73 Google hits. So, I supoose that now any votes to keep or delete it will have to do mostly with whether she is famous enough or not. Optim 06:33, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Not a vote. Only one of her books appears to be popular enough (in the UK) to be listed on Amazon and be widely available. LOC has some more of her books list in their catalog.
    • New article is sub-stub. Put on Cleanup and delete if not improved. Andre Engels 13:18, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep - needs cleanup - Texture 16:11, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • King M.C. & D.J. Flash - non-famous, despite the fact that the article says they have garnered "world wide fame". Google turns up 5 hits with the search "King MC and DJ Flash". Darkcore 06:28, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • They are on allmusic.com, so they're famous. Keep. Mrdice 10:18, 2004 Feb 24 (UTC)
    • If the current article is correct, I'd say they're famous enough to keep. Andre Engels 13:18, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • List of Pokémon Redundant; list already available in Pokémon article. --Faradn 09:24, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep and redirect to Pokémon. Saul Taylor 11:14, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep and link from Pokemon. Anthony DiPierro 16:09, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge and redirect -- Graham  :) 13:06, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep list page, remove list from Pokémon. I like the format in the article better than that in the list. --zandperl 15:33, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - people will search for Pokémon not for "List of..." Even if they didn't, it would hit on Pokemon and that's what they want. - Texture 16:11, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Well, uh, people will search for aircraft carrier and not for List of aircraft carriers, but that doesn't mean we don't have the latter. It's important to structure useful information in different ways to meet people's needs. That said, List of Pokémon is useful but needs to be organized better (preferably by someone who understands the Pokedex better than I do). So, after all that, Keep. RadicalBender 16:25, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • You make my argument for me... in aircraft carrier is a wiki link to List of aircraft carriers but even if that didn't exist (as I suggest for Pokemon) then the aircraft carrier page (not the list of...) has a link to "Haze Gray & Underway, World Aircraft Carrier Lists: " - Texture 16:53, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
        • I can't figure out what point you're arguing for. You're saying we shouldn't reproduce information that's found elsewhere on the internet? Maybe we should all pack up and go home then! I grant you, it is a duplication of the information found on Pokémon, but it should be offloaded to the list page. RadicalBender 17:01, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Could be useful to someone, and a list that long is too cumbersome to be on the original Pokemon article. Everyking 19:26, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. If we're going to list every goddamn imaginary Middle-Earth king ever, we might as well have the Pokemon too. jengod 00:24, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)
      • That's not the point. The point is that we have two lists. We should keep one and redirect the other. RickK 03:28, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Public exchange - advert - link to page it advertizes doesn't even work - Texture 17:16, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • The concept of a public exchange is valid, but the content here is not. Delete or stub. - DropDeadGorgias 22:35, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
  • Consequentialist justifications of the state - Was this deleted once already? The only google hits I can find are cached wikipedia mirrors or cites and the current pages don't exist - as if it was deleted from those sites after being deleted here. What is this? - Texture 18:13, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete unless improved. This doesn't contain clear consequentialist (that is, moral) justifications of state. It furthermore seems like original research. I think the title is an important enough topic, but the article doesn't seem to be on it as written. Cool Hand Luke 18:30, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Suicide by cop - I'm not convinced that this is common terminology, or even a recognised concept. Can anyone confirm it? Deb 18:19, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep - common concept, widely used. Google shows scientific works, news articles and 7400 hits. Note that page is missing VfD boilerplate. Przepla 18:29, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - common concept, but article is an advert for web page and dictionary definition at that. - Texture 18:44, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Expand or wiktionary. Anthony DiPierro 18:54, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, definitely. It can always be reworked. Everyking 19:26, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Sounds plausible, so why shouldn't we keep it? <KF> 19:47, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Yes, it's a recognized concept and common terminology, at least in the U.S., at least in the past five years or so. It is not just "plausible." Dpbsmith 21:39, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Comment. I created the text because it was requested: http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:ljmNEnS9-IcJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_articles+Suicide+by+cop&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 The phrase is quite new, as is, probably, the act, but it is all too real. I have marked it as a stub, as I agree it should probably be fleshed out.
    • Keep. It has name recoginition (for me, at least).→Raul654 22:56, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. It's quite real. jengod 00:24, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)
  • Formula editor - dictionary definition - Texture 18:40, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • This is a stub, but there is encyclopedic value of the algorithms, or other technologies could be listed. - DropDeadGorgias 22:35, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
  • West Norwood Cemetery - do we really need an article on every cemetary in the world? Anthony DiPierro 18:46, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • No, but West Norwood is quite a well known one. -- Graham  :) 19:09, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Yeah I hear people are dying to get in there. Anthony DiPierro 19:35, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Sure we do. Cemeteries are important for historical reasons. Keep. Everyking 21:00, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Even Wikipedia contributors will end on a cemetery, if they not choose something more exotic like sea burial... Even better would be to have some information on who (noteworthy) was buried there... --Palapala 21:33, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. (We'll end up where/what--? I choose something less exotic but more entertaining.) Already have many links to many probably minor cemeteries. Elf 23:26, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. jengod 00:24, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)
  • Clinton Recession - POV article with links to two POV MSNBC articles that won't exist in two months - (Numbered articles are archived after a time) - Texture 18:50, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge with Recession and redirect -- Graham  :) 19:09, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge with Clinton (under ecomonomic policies) and delete
  • Countdown (supermarket) seems like advertising. The encyclopedic information is that most of these supermarkets have tile floors! User:Geogre
    • Neutral, it could improve but if it doesn't after 7 days then delete. Stub notice added fwiw -- Graham  :) 19:09, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • List of films about possessed body parts - this doesn't seem significant enough to warrant an article. I don't see this being expandable at all. Darkcore 19:55, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Not only is the list not expandable, half of the list is the evil dead series, which is really just the same possessed hand. - DropDeadGorgias 20:00, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 20:39, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Brains, eyes and hair? But maybe keep the list of hands as an individual article, if that's a common enough feature of horror films. Everyking 21:00, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep! C'mon! Organ donation-based demonic possession is the topic of at least three movies I can think of. :) jengod 00:24, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. The Addams Family at least is famous enough, and I'd guess that some horror films should be listed too. Pakaran. 01:30, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Addams Family? Since when is Thing a "possessed body part" vs. a self-contained creature? RickK 03:33, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. A list makes sense if it is referenced from other places. The usability of this one is close to zero: hardly someone will look up the title of the article. Mikkalai 01:53, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Spurious relationship - dictionary definition with a spurious relationship with ice cream and a heat wave. - Texture 21:08, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - DropDeadGorgias 22:35, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete Oberiko 22:50, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. The article needs more work, but the example is nice -- very simple and clearly explained, and that's a lot more than can be said for some things I've seen in Wikipedia! The topic is important in the interpretation of statistical data. Perhaps it should be moved to spurious correlation or spurious association. Michael Hardy 23:45, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. It is a part of Logical fallacy family. Mikkalai 02:01, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • KPPP - advert for someone programming in KDE - check out the rinky-dink user's home page linked - Texture 21:47, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Dallas F. Bell Jr., vanity page. Google turns up several hits, but the top two are for his vanity site; the others are unrelated. —Frecklefoot 22:02, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Fractional probability Fanciful personal theory, hasn't lived up to advance advertising or had any convincing details. Charles Matthews 22:58, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Original research. Isomorphic 23:13, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. The author seems to lack the ability to explain his thoughts, not only in this article, but also in really basic matters. See the stuff on the discussion page about the Poisson distribution: first he thinks the Poisson distribution is continuous because the parametrized family of all Poisson distributions is continuous; then when persuaded otherwise he seems to think the Poisson distribution is a weird exception in that the parameter space is continuous and the distribution is discrete. The page should perhaps be recreated when its present author or someone else is able to write clearly about it. Michael Hardy 23:41, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

February 25

  • The Church Brew Works - I share the "Wikipedia is not paper" position, yet I don't think Wikipedia should comprise the yellow pages.DrZ 02:22, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • It's a fairly unique bar. Keep. Anthony DiPierro 02:31, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • I agree, it's fairly unique, but the article needs to do a better job at telling that to the world. I don't know enough about it to do it myself. Right now, it is an ad. Lacking improvement... Delete. Brian Rock 02:36, 2004 Feb 25 (UTC)
    • Keep if it can be made to not sound like an ad. Everyking 03:41, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • I am from Pittsburgh, love the place.. it SHOULD have an entry, unsure of waht to add to it to make it not an ad. Will atemppt to help on Friday. Lyellin 04:28, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)
  • Tai Lam Country Park Directions to an obscure park. Perl 03:26, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • And yet I couldn't find my way there even if I studied it all day. Delete. Everyking 03:41, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/archive_May_2004&oldid=2520519"