Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NATO at the 2004 Summer Olympics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Wile E. Heresiarch (talk | contribs) at 16:17, 30 September 2004. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Huh? Are they nearly the same? Mikkalai 05:38, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

  • No idea about the intentions that were at the origin of this article. Even if I think I saw some clues, I'm not Sherlock and might be mistaken. Anyway I decided to add my modest contribution and play the game. And frankly, keep or delete, I don't care, except that I would hesitate to encourage the VfD craze, and my natural tendency could be in the end to vote for keep. --Pgreenfinch 07:25, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Original research and pretty pointless at that. --G Rutter 08:27, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • delete pointless crap --Jiang 09:04, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. I can see no merit in this whatsoever. Average Earthman 09:09, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. What a conundrum for Pgreenfinch! Either vote delete, as it is obvious, and set a precedent for his pet article European Union at the 2004 Summer Olympics; or vote keep, and be seen to support a ridiculous article! -- Chuq 12:19, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
    • No problem, dear Chuq, and thanks for caring about my well-being, and also for the fun. I enjoy this trap that is only a trap in the eyes of the trapper. Just remember the -stan case, which was built as a trap also, but which article at the end was kept. Fun, wasn'it? Well, now I just watch, I might be needed as the famed swing voter, although it doesn't seem so, but it is the most comfortable situation, believe me ;-)) --Pgreenfinch 12:57, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Ambi 13:02, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Utterly pointless (particularly as the membership of the EU and NATO substantially overlap). -- Necrothesp 13:09, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Complete waste of time, by an IP with an interesting history, my guess is that it is an attempt to prove a point. Andrewa 14:22, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Abstain The article proves it's point well, if european union at the 2004 summer olympics stays then it sets a precedent that this has to stay too(although the article could use signficent cleaning up). Chuckf
    • If even its creator, doesn't consider it noteworthy enough to vote to keep, then it's time to speedy delete it. And as a mostly sidenote, the article doesn't prove any point -- I remember no suggestion by top NATO officials about the NATO teams competing under one flag for example, nor have multiple sources cared to make this same calculation. Aris Katsaris 16:13, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. This is vandalism of Wikipedia in order to make a point in an argument. See here: [1] As such it's time to delete the article and start contemplating restrictions on the idiot who abuses the system of Wikipedia and wastes our time just in order to win some sort of pissing contest. Aris Katsaris 16:13, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: joke. Wile E. Heresiarch 16:17, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)