Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of events named pogrom: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:({{Find sources|List of events named pogrom}}) |
:({{Find sources|List of events named pogrom}}) |
||
[[WP:POINT|Point]]y [[WP:POVFORK|POVFORK]] based on [[WP:OR|Original research]]. See [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Definitions of Pogrom|original deletion discussion]] and [[Talk:Pogrom]] for this editor's [[WP:POINTY|history]]. See also [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Definitions of pogrom (2nd nomination)|related AFD from same editor]] [[User:Zargulon|Zargulon]] ([[User talk:Zargulon|talk]]) 21:56, 2 February 2014 (UTC) |
[[WP:POINT|Point]]y [[WP:POVFORK|POVFORK]] based on [[WP:OR|Original research]]. See [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Definitions of Pogrom|original deletion discussion]] and [[Talk:Pogrom]] for this editor's [[WP:POINTY|history]]. See also [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Definitions of pogrom (2nd nomination)|related AFD from same editor]] [[User:Zargulon|Zargulon]] ([[User talk:Zargulon|talk]]) 21:56, 2 February 2014 (UTC) |
||
* '''Delete''', for the reasons mentioned above.--[[User:Galassi|Galassi]] ([[User talk:Galassi|talk]]) 22:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC) |
|||
:: Which is not especially useful seeing as no reasons were given. [[User:Zero0000|Zero]]<sup><small>[[User_talk:Zero0000|talk]]</small></sup> 23:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Oppose'''. Nominator has an obligation to make a case for deletion, not just to provide some wikilinks to other pages and remarks about a user. The deleted article [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Oncenawhile/Definitions_of_Pogrom&oldid=543285124 Definitions of pogrom] looked nothing at all like this one, so that discussion is entirely irrelevant. This nomination should be closed forthwith as improperly formed. [[User:Zero0000|Zero]]<sup><small>[[User_talk:Zero0000|talk]]</small></sup> 22:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC) |
* '''Oppose'''. Nominator has an obligation to make a case for deletion, not just to provide some wikilinks to other pages and remarks about a user. The deleted article [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Oncenawhile/Definitions_of_Pogrom&oldid=543285124 Definitions of pogrom] looked nothing at all like this one, so that discussion is entirely irrelevant. This nomination should be closed forthwith as improperly formed. [[User:Zero0000|Zero]]<sup><small>[[User_talk:Zero0000|talk]]</small></sup> 22:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC) |
||
* '''Nominator should be investigated for violation of [[WP:CANVAS]]'''. Apart from the obligatory notice to the article's author, the nominator sought help from 7 editors who can be reasonably expected to agree with the nominator: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Zad68&diff=prev&oldid=593644435] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Galassi&diff=prev&oldid=593644907] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Plot_Spoiler&diff=prev&oldid=593644973] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jayjg&diff=prev&oldid=593645036] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ynhockey&diff=prev&oldid=593645122] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Shrike&diff=prev&oldid=593645345] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Brewcrewer&diff=prev&oldid=593645493]. [[User:Zero0000|Zero]]<sup><small>[[User_talk:Zero0000|talk]]</small></sup> 23:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 23:08, 2 February 2014
- List of events named pogrom (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Pointy POVFORK based on Original research. See original deletion discussion and Talk:Pogrom for this editor's history. See also related AFD from same editor Zargulon (talk) 21:56, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- Delete, for the reasons mentioned above.--Galassi (talk) 22:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- Which is not especially useful seeing as no reasons were given. Zerotalk 23:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose. Nominator has an obligation to make a case for deletion, not just to provide some wikilinks to other pages and remarks about a user. The deleted article Definitions of pogrom looked nothing at all like this one, so that discussion is entirely irrelevant. This nomination should be closed forthwith as improperly formed. Zerotalk 22:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
- Nominator should be investigated for violation of WP:CANVAS. Apart from the obligatory notice to the article's author, the nominator sought help from 7 editors who can be reasonably expected to agree with the nominator: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]. Zerotalk 23:08, 2 February 2014 (UTC)