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 Meelar (talk | contribs) at 01:23, 28 February 2004 (removed "Top o' the Bruce"--no consensus to delete). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Attention: Some time in the early hours of February 27th (UTC) a major edit was made to this page where the entire contents were copied and pasted to the bottom of the page. The page has been added to and edited more since then. We have attempted to fix this edit. If you made a vote between 3am and 12 noon on February 27 (UTC), check to see if your vote is still there.

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 21

  • 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)
  • 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) See below.
    • 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)
    • Bowing to the near-consensus, I've moved it to Plus and minus signs, which is more general than plus sign and suggests possible expansion to a collection of data on other familiar notations. The article needs a lot of work, which I'm beginning now. Dandrake 00:39, Feb 28, 2004 (UTC)

February 22

  • 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)
    • Please remove and merge w/Sarah M-C and Cyrus C; agree w/Optim. SM-C should get a redirect; Lynn Marple may not need one. As one of the people who (voted to keep and) tried to clean up and NPOV the Sarah M-C article, I think strongly that these three should be (at most) a single article, with some attention given to both Cyrus (much specific life-detail) and to Sarah (unusual modern suicide). +sj+ 08:21, 2004 Feb 25 (UTC)
    • Delete. Or redirect to her daughter's page. Kingturtle 09:00, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Redirect to Sarah Marple-Cantrell. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:11, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - reasonably pointless article not encyclopediaworthy under any circumstances. Ludraman, 2235, 27/02/04
    • Delete. Wiki is not paper --- but that doesn't mean we should have six billion pages for every man, woman, and child on earth, each of whom is, let's face it, unique and special in his or her own way, but not deserving of a Wiki page. I myself get more than 50 hits on Google, have appeared on radio and television several times, have had my writing and illustrations published in several papers, and... and I don't deserve a Wiki page. Neither does anyone who has to write it themselves, for that matter. Ensiform 23:59, 27 Feb 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)
        • However, a search of books would find the cites listed right on the page. He's listed in Who's Who in America and Who's Who in American Art and there is no evidence of serious recognition? You have got to be kidding me. --Daniel C. Boyer 14:24, 27 Feb 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)
        • As Eloquence has now admitted this bias, I would argue that we should disregard his vote. --Daniel C. Boyer 14:24, 27 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)

February 23

  • 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)
    • Keep. Google ain't god, and I say wait for an art person or other who can verify this, or falsify it. Meelar 01:23, 28 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)
      • [1] 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"
      • [2] 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)
    • I like having lots of articles about new ideas, terms, movements. This is great. If "arfe" is a minor movement or technique now, no problem. I don't like having lots of personal articles about people, since they are ime harder to keep NPOV. Keep Arfé (ideally with links to instances of it), leave FRR as a note on that page... +sj+ 06:03, 2004 Feb 25 (UTC)
      • ideas, terms, and movements are fine, but there's no verification that this one actually exists. Anthony DiPierro 20:31, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Meelar 01:23, 28 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)
    • Delete, agree with Andre. PMC 17:29, 26 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)
    • Please look at the page again and give some constructive criticisms before re-voting. VfD is a last resort and the page needs at least a little advice from those who want it deleted before any rush to delete it. I note that as of yet none of the above have offered any advice on how to improve the page.Zestauferov 15:56, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • I have looked at the page, and my response is still to delete outright. I am sure if any of the other six people above thought the page could be improved they would have said so. They haven't. -- Graham  :) 16:20, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. At best it's a duplicate of the material atCaucasian peoples. -- llywrch 01:02, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Fair enough. I will just have to disambiguate and NPOV Caucasian peoples some time in the future then. But what if in the meantime someone comes to Wiki looking for an explanation of what Hetto-Iberians refers to? Should they find nothing?Zestauferov 02:53, 27 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)
    • Move to wiktionary if not there already. Wile E. Heresiarch 12:13, 25 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)
    • Delete: irrelevant, vanity. Wile E. Heresiarch 12:13, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. no significance. 129.240.69.213 05:56, 26 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)
    • I see nothing wrong with this article. Every statement that is made in this article can be verified in any research methods book. Please explain what you find wrong with the article. It seems to me that every day the deletion madness on this page reaches new hights. By the way, the author's link to noun, although unorthodox, is valid: nominal in the context of research data categories means in name only. mydogategodshat 07:01, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. OK as it stands. Wile E. Heresiarch 12:13, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • 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)
    • Delete, but not before archiving at BJAODN. The most hysterical thing I've seen all day. - Seth Ilys 05:43, 26 Feb 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
    • Merge with Doom (game) and redirect. Wile E. Heresiarch 12:13, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

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)
  • 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)
  • 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)
    • I wrote this one, under the inspiration of Larry. One of the Larry's text articles is on "the justification of the state" and he included a link to "consequentialist etc." But that link was the dreaded color red. Whether it was red because some earlier effort to create such an article had been deleted, as texture suggests, or not I don't know. Still, I wrote an article to fill this logical space. I'd be curious to hear from Larry on the subject!
    • Keep: valid topic, OK as it stands. Naturally it could benefit from attention, like 99.99% of WP. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:31, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Accounting cost - dictionary definition - Texture 18:40, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep if you can find formulas. - DropDeadGorgias 22:35, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
    • Yes this is a dictionary definition and probably won't be expanded much further. No there are no formulas. Move to Wiktionary but keep a redirect in WP space for the articles that currently link to it. mydogategodshat 07:55, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Wiktionary and delete. (No, there are no relevant formulae. It's too general a concept.) Unless there is objection, I will clean up the links and cross-reference them to Wiktionary:Accounting cost. Rossami 18:34, 27 Feb 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
    • Keep: recognizable phrase -- shows up in political web sites. Remove external links that will certainly go stale soon. Wile E. Heresiarch 13:09, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • I've rewritten somewhat. I vote keep by the way--I've heard this phrase, and political slogans are encyclopedic. Someone look over my edits? Meelar 05:22, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep as currently written. Long enough to be more than a dictionary definition, NPOV enough. Now, who's going to write the article on Golden Age of Clinton Prosperity? Dpbsmith 14:57, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC) P.S. That last was a joke. folks.
    • Redirect to Bush Recession;-) Doovinator 20:39, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • 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)
    • Delete: insignificant. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:31, 27 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)
    • Keep, though reformatting it into a list of films dealing with body horror might be more appropriate. -Sean 05:45, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Argh! My childhood nightmares in one article! Noooo! Keep -- Graham  :) 07:38, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, but try to merge with a horror article somehow -- Obli 17:47, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep - this is potentially interesting, especially in the context of horror movies, but please integrate it into a broader discussion! Mark Richards 23:21, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Fun and reasonable encylopaedic. DJ Clayworth 16:48, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, it's already longer than many of our newly-created lists at over 30 films. fabiform | talk 17:15, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Part of the reason why Wikipedia Rocks. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 13:23, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
  • Huck Hodge - nonfamous - DropDeadGorgias 19:58, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete Oberiko 22:50, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete -- Graham  :) 07:38, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: nonfamous. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:31, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. surely this is a no-brainer. His claim to fame is being a student at two universities? Ensiform 00:06, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Self-collaborative learning, Dara Horrorwitz, BSSCL - Google finds no hits for BSSCL or Dara Horrorwitz (or even Dara Horowitz) - Self-collaborative learning has zero hits when used with "Horrorwitz" or "Horowitz" - Texture 20:38, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete Oberiko 22:50, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete -- Graham  :) 07:38, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep -- Google can not yet find what is written in books. refer to: Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology Andcognitive Science Troja 10:01, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Troja, please do not remove the VfD tag from articles that are still listed on this page. I have restored the VfD tag for Self-collaborative learning. - Texture 15:04, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete all: idiosyncratic, insignificant. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:31, 27 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)
    • Keep - this could be developed further. mydogategodshat 07:20, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Needs work, but that's just like every other article. Wile E. Heresiarch 13:09, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Jacob1207 17:40, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Short but already a good article. Andrewa 19:29, 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)
    • Delete - DropDeadGorgias 22:35, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete Oberiko 22:50, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete vanity page -- Graham  :) 07:38, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: vanity. Wile E. Heresiarch 13:09, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Ooh, he has a free website! Not like all those others... Ensiform 00:08, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • CeeCee Lyles - 9/11 victim -- Graham  :) 22:45, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete Oberiko 22:50, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. One of the more famous/noteworthy 9/11 victims. Anthony DiPierro 23:48, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • You think everyone is noteworthy, but in this case you're right. Keep. Cool Hand Luke 05:34, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
        • Ah, but I don't think everyone is more famous/noteworthy :). Anthony DiPierro 21:17, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Everyking 03:41, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Not just any 9/11 victim. Isomorphic 08:09, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. --Palapala 10:58, 25 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)
    • Delete: original research; confused and confusing at that. Wile E. Heresiarch 13:09, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

February 25

  • Thegreyking -- a "review" of sorts of a book called The Grey King -- BCorr ¤ Брайен 00:09, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Only 3 minutes old before listing here. Has already been moved to The Grey King, give it time and if still no improvement list on cleanup -- Graham  :) 00:13, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Anthony DiPierro 03:56, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep it, while not particularly well written there is some useful info there. List it on cleanup - for starters it needs spoiler warning, more plot synopsis, isbn link and general tidying. akaDruid 11:45, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - still a book review - Texture 15:08, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. We have plenty of pages devoted to individual short stories and books. As long as it's real and a famous book, I think it should stay; although maybe it could be made into a The Dark is Rising subject. - DropDeadGorgias 15:32, 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)
    • Delete but the attempt at directions made me chuckle -- Graham  :) 07:53, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Comment: I'm not even sure what country to start in, so the directions aren't a lot of use to me. Andrewa 08:39, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, nonsense. Mrdice 10:38, 2004 Feb 25 (UTC)
    • Delete, not actual nonsense but useless out of context. It's also copyvio [3]. The park is in Hong Kong - may be worthy of a future article. akaDruid 11:32, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Change vote: Keep, in light of updates - article now useful, and copyvio issues are addressed. Good work done to rescue this.akaDruid 10:12, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 15:08, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - DropDeadGorgias 15:32, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Important place in Hong Kong. (If it where in the US it wouldn't made this page at all.) 129.240.69.213 05:56, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • If it was as badly written as this one was when it was first listed here, I can assure you it would. Change vote to cleanup since page has improved -- Graham  :) 08:08, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Another comment: I agree with 129.240.69.213. Andrewa 16:05, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep - has improved and can improve further. You can remove the directions if you do not like them. Besides, not a copyvio: see the notice at [4]. olivier 09:21, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep: useful info, significant. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:40, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • TLA/E - a dictionary definition of something that will probably never be in any dictionary. Might be worth a mention on the TLA article if it's actually used occasionally, but I see no value in keeping it as an independant page. Bryan 07:58, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Redirect to TLA. Andrewa 08:36, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Redirect as suggested: already appears in TLA. --Phil 11:37, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 15:08, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • I made it into redirect, along with ETLA. Obviously, the guy didn't know the *whole* story. Mikkalai 20:54, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Offensive wand 1 line definition plus a link. Might be an advert - at the very least this needs expansion to be an article. I say delete it or merge it with Nethack, but open to suggestions. akaDruid 11:25, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - advert to user web page - likely won't be there in the future - Texture 15:08, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. —Frecklefoot 20:43, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, not worthy of article or even redirect. Andrewa 09:15, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: insignficant. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:40, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Bielefeld-Verschwörung not encyclopedic --217.81.148.235 15:55, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, interesting enough to warrant an article imho -- Graham  :) 16:34, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Definitely an important part of German Usenet culture. Just yesterday I was reading the de: version of that article! :-) -- Timwi 18:03, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. (Of course as original author). Popular in-joke in german usenet - might be comparable with the BOFH in the english usenet culture. andy 20:27, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. It's just a fun-article without a true statement.
  • Ascend - a one line description of how to win in Nethack. Nethack article already discusses game play - Texture 17:00, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Created by the same anon user who made the Offensive wand entry. —Frecklefoot 20:43, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Not worthy of article or redirect. Andrewa 09:15, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: insignficant. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:40, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

February 26

  • Honourable Ve'ehala Perl 02:06, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • See music of Tonga to understand who the subject is, but I'm not sure what the user was trying to say. In any case, vote to delete now, but I just may write a real article (or at least stub) later tonight Tuf-Kat 02:14, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)
  • Unibrow - dictionary definition - Texture 03:24, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Have tried to add more content. Keep? San de Berg 10:16, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. More info there now than in a dictionary definition. "Hirsute"–what a great word. :-) —Frecklefoot 17:54, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Heh, keep. Otherwise we'll just have to keep deleting worse versions. -- Infrogmation 20:40, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: joke, dictionary defn. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:49, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Topic worthy for inclusion in encyclopedia, if not really that interesting or significant. --Daniel C. Boyer 14:12, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Move to wiktionary. Exploding Boy 16:43, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia:Pedantry dispute Unreadable nonsense. Might have a point, somewhere, but fails utterly in the task of making it. Almost worthy of immediate deletion under the patent nonsense rule, but maybe someone can rescue it. Tannin 03:34, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Even if it can be rescued I'm sure a better name can be found for it than this. Delete -- Graham  :) 07:52, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - unnecessary. --zandperl 14:47, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Of course, it became unreadable due to pedantry. It must go to Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense - but part if not most of the joke is the pedantic edits. I don't know if there is a way of keeping the edit history. It was a magnet for pedants! Secretlondon 22:11, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
  • Tam Kung - directions to an obscure temple somewhere in Hong Kong I think. Even the article says that it's primarily frequented by locals. Darkcore 04:56, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Interesting. Andrewa 09:19, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Tam Kung is actually a South Chinese deity. I have added material to the article. More is obviously needed. olivier 09:27, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)
  • Tics - Should be Tic, but has no useful content anyway. Warofdreams 16:09, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 16:53, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, but rename. It should be moved to "List of tics" and should have a stub notice. One entry does not a list make. —Frecklefoot 18:03, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Just delete. -- Infrogmation 20:40, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Yah, way to be rude to the noobs. You guys are just the coolest. Lirath Q. Pynnor
    • Keep: valid topic. Move to list of pages needing attention. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:49, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Lilo & Stitch: The Experiments - Contains a list with links to experiments, apparently some feature in the lilo and stitch tv series, user seems to be in progress making separate articles for exery experiment, should be merged with the lilo and stitch article or deleted --Obli 16:30, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge and delete - Texture 16:45, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. What's the harm? Fictional characters are valid encyclopedia topics, and as you noted, the list is getting filled out. Maybe move to "List of Experiments from Lilo & Stitch", or something of the sort. Meelar 16:46, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Subject is a little obscure, but linked articles are encyclopedic and, ergo, a list seems necessary. I'm a little unsure of the naming conventions though - possible future clashes? It seems work in progress for now - vote no delete till a future stage. akaDruid 17:13, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, definitely. This is of cultural note. Everyking 00:49, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: useless, insignificant. No need to clutter up WP with this. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:49, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Full_Circle_Temple Non famous temple of nonfamous sect + POV rant. Mrdice 19:05, 2004 Feb 26 (UTC)
    • Keep. It's a bit POV, so cleanup. It might not be "famous", but probably noteworthy enough to have an entry in an electronic encyclopedia. Cool Hand Luke 20:08, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, list on cleanup. Places of worship are encyclopedic -- Graham  :) 22:08, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Everyking 00:53, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Assistant - definition. Darkcore 20:25, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Wikipedia is no dictionary. Mrdice 20:54, 2004 Feb 26 (UTC)
    • Delete. Useless Dmn 14:47, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • List of Europeans - offensively short and seemingly pointless. This does not represent europe and its history accurately Dmn 21:13, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - POV, first line says "This list is for important Europeans. For a more specific list covering people from the European Union, see List of EU people " - someone decided these were more important than the rest. (Heck, I'd vote with you just for being the one person who knows the difference between "it's" and "its"... ) - Texture 21:22, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. VfD is not cleanup. Anthony DiPierro 21:27, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge List of Europeans and List of people by EU state into one article, and redirect to it: there is no point having two articles on the same subject -- Graham  :) 21:36, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. The topic is just too vast for a list to properly cover without becoming silly. Everyking 00:49, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • "List of [insert country name here]s" would be okay, although a little pointless, but this is 1) useless and 2) looks flamebait-ish, as it tickles some 30+ different flavours of patriotism. Delete. Kosebamse 07:24, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Matrix (math) - just a redirect page to Matrix (mathematics). No links to it. Walt Pohl 09:26, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep valid redirects, even if they're not in use. Dysprosia 09:29, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • But it's a stupid redirect. -- Walt Pohl 09:35, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
        • The one you just added below (and I removed) was more stupid. The term "math" is rather common in the US, no? And it's in standard bracket disambiguation form, so it could be potentially used. Dysprosia 09:37, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
          • Why did you remove matrix (mathematic)? What possible reason do we have for having a redirect page for a rare mispelling of mathematics? And why do we need matrix (math)? I don't get the logic here. -- Walt Pohl 09:41, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
          • Duh, I just realized you meant you had removed the "matrix (mathematic)" page. Sorry about that.
          • Math is the American term for mathematics and is not a misspelling. The disambiguation form for articles is generally [[name (topic)]]. For example, Matrix (mathematics). It then, has the potential of being created by someone who is not quite sure about the system here. So it is a valid redirect, even if it is not being used, and should not be deleted. Take a look at Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion criteria, where this discussion should probably be moved... HTH Dysprosia 09:50, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
            • So, should there be a redirect for Matrix_(maths)? :-) Dpbsmith 02:49, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
              • Yes, perhaps there should. Dysprosia 09:00, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
                • OK, now perhaps there is. Dpbsmith 11:34, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep as a redirect to Matrix (mathematics). Wile E. Heresiarch 08:49, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Internet game - belongs to wikitionary, is short and the info probably exists on another article -- Obli 17:25, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Looks lame now, but let me try to improve it. If it duplicates info in other articles, then delete I guess. —Frecklefoot 17:46, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Not speedy deletion, please don't list such entries here, try WP:VFD Dori | Talk 05:43, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)
  • Cultur - just a redirect page for a mispelling of culture. No links to it. -- Walt Pohl 07:06, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Agree with above Dmn 14:47, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Mathematic - just a redirect page for a mispelling of mathematics. No links to it (other than Daniel Quinlan's redirect project list). -- Walt Pohl 07:06, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, it's the rarely used singlular form of mathematics. --Jiang
    • Delete, since I don't think it's ever used. Dysprosia 09:04, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete Dmn 14:47, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Dark compact - Dark compact of literary fame.
    • Clearly has merit, no deletion warranted, and especially not a speedy one. - Plautus satire 05:31, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep -- Decumanus 05:38, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete -- Vanity for Plautus -- SheikYerBooty 05:40, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)
    • Not speedy deletion, please don't list such entries here, try WP:VFD Dori | Talk 05:43, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)
      • Isn't WP:VFD the same as this page ? I tried it and got redirected to here. Jay 13:51, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete with extreme prejudice :) -- BCorr ¤ Брайен 22:44, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep - Texture 22:52, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep - there *is* something to say on the issue. Although I admit the term gives zillions of spurious google hits (like, about "dark, compact mass"). BTW are there any synonyms for suitable for redirect, like, dark covenant: what is this? Mikkalai 02:42, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - List of all two-letter combinations, this is completely useless and just makes things more complicated. Give me one reason of how this could benefit anyone.
    • Keep. Take a look at Talk:List of all two-letter combinations. (BTW, it is always a good idea in cases of doubt.) Mikkalai 02:48, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep: Useful. Optim 03:29, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete. Ridiculous. Everyking 03:32, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Whatever may have been the case in the past, the fact that most of the combinations currently actually link to something justifies keeping it. Dpbsmith 13:36, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - 138.88.234.170 15:27, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep - its actually pretty interesting, since it links to articles corresponding to the 2-letter combinations. -Seth Mahoney 19:14, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - The purpose of an encyclopedia is not only to provide data but to organize and associate it. See dichotomization. Either change this page's name to a subdivision of the scrabble page or kill it. Bensaccount 23:39, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

February 27

  • Gabaldi Bound, John-Paul Vitale, My TV - I can find no evidence of any of these on Google search other than Wiki articles. The articles also have (virtually) no content. Power 00:42, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • The very first link for Gabaldi Bound on google is a non-wiki article. Anthony DiPierro 03:00, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • It is only 1 guy at the website, and it doesn't even have a show description. The rest of the top 10 are wiki or clones. Power 03:46, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 15:35, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: personal promotion. Wile E. Heresiarch 00:29, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Edward Mung - looks like vanity page. Page has a weird edit history. Evercat 02:46, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete unless verifiable. Looks like nonsense. There was an Edward Mung at Earl Haig Sec. Sch in 1999, but this says he graduated in 1980. Anthony DiPierro 03:10, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 15:35, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Article says he was CEO of Pixar at one point. Can that be verified? Not a vote. Wile E. Heresiarch 00:29, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • If it were true he would definitely show up in a google of "Edward Mung Pixar". Try the "news" search to be sure. - Texture 00:35, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Daniel John Lee - nonfamous, did nothing notable except die. --Jiang 03:17, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Everyking 03:32, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • I agree with Jiang, but I think it's better a sysop goes through this systematically. I see a whole bunch of unfamiliar names at [5] for example. -- Dissident 03:33, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Wikimemorial and delete. Bearcat 03:57, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. No reason to delete. Anthony DiPierro 04:25, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - No reason to keep - Texture 15:35, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Eber Eber appears in some genealogical lists in the Old Testament, according to which he was a descendent of Noah through Shem and an ancestor of Abraham and hence the Israelites. His name is possibly related to the word “Hebrew”. That’s about all there is to say about him, but this article makes all sorts of assertions about peoples and places and events. For example, from the above facts it manages to “deduce” that all of the differences between Hebrew and other Canaanite dialects are due to the influence of a language dubbed “Eberite”, which was likely related to Hurrian. It’s wild speculation and should be deleted. Josh Cherry 03:48, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • - No Josh you are wrong. First step is to copy edit it and then if it fails to come out looking good VFD it. Go and edit it to the way you think it should look first then come back here. And read through the discussion first. To me this just looks like another attemt to cover up admin abuse in the talk page. Zestauferov 08:13, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, but NPOVify. I'm run across these theories a number of times. -- Seth Ilys 12:58, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete unless NPOV'd - Texture 15:35, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete: unfixable. Attempts have already been made (see Talk:Eber) to straighten out this article. No sense in spending more time on it. Wile E. Heresiarch 00:46, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Turing Machine with faults, failures and recovery - a copy of [6] but it "appears" it was posted by the author (see page history). However, it is a (badly worded) description of the program which I don't consider of value to an encyclopedia. RedWolf 05:02, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
    • Salvage whatever useful info is on it and incorporate it into Turing Machine, then make it a redirect. -- Dissident 05:13, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete and merge into Turing Machine - Texture 15:35, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Hazel E. McLane. Genealogical info for an obscure family, several unwikified paragraphs, only two of which refer to the person in the title of the article. RickK 05:05, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Also John McLane, from the same poster. RickK 05:11, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Well, John McLane was apparently Governor of New Hampshire, so I guess that can stay (but certainly not as the genealogical entry it is right now). (Insert Die Hard joke) Adam Bishop 05:15, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 15:35, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Pi Omega Nu -- non-encylopedic self-promotion, pointless, candidate for fast-track deletion? -- The Anome 10:49, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • GMTA, was about to add it myself. Perhaps it should be deleted straight off. Dysprosia 10:50, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 15:35, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Sunset High School (Hayward) - someone's personal commentary on a high school that has been closed down for 14 years. Pointless and non-encyclopedic. Darkcore 11:22, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep if edited for NPOV and removal of personal commentary. --Daniel C. Boyer 14:14, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 15:35, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. It's a high school. Everyking 17:43, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Actually, it WAS a high school. It no longer exists. Darkcore 22:36, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
        • I suppose you'd support deleting the article on Julius Caesar, on the grounds that he died a long time ago? Everyking 23:12, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • USS Whipple - just a bunch of external links Dori | Talk 15:23, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete unless expanded - Texture 15:35, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Perl 15:39, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Make it a disambiguation, but then delete the redirect USS Whipple (DD-217) andy 16:02, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Everyking 17:43, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • I have expanded the page a little. It should be kept, of course, as a page linking to one page for each of the ships that have carried that name, and explaining the name. I have changed USS Whipple (DD-217) into a stub instead of a redirect to this page USS Whipple. —Morven 19:33, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Dystmesis - Unverifiable. It's not in dictionary.com, nor is in google's define function. Google search only yields about 60 hits for this word, most of which are really just wikipedia articles, or other encyclopedias that source wikipedia. NOTE: this article is also being vfd'd at Talk:Litotes on the grounds of being moved to wiktionary, but I also wanted to list this article individually for being unverifiable. - DropDeadGorgias 16:00, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
  • List of Paraguayans - one line of five words does not make a list or an article - what happened to starting these things in user space until it is actually an article? - Texture 16:57, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • A bit politician heavy but how about a list of 18? And that was just from the Paraguay article and others linking from it. Keep -- Graham  :) 18:16, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Chella - User:Chellabm is okay, but this is just one more user page. <KF> 17:08, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete - user page masquerading as an article - Texture 18:09, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Merge with user page and delete -- Graham  :) 18:17, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Karras - a disambiguation page for two articles that do not exist. That isn't why it should be deleted - it is merely two names with the same last name. If this is valid then we need one for Jones, Smith, and Johnson - Texture 18:07, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Crotopo soup has been listed on Talk:List of recipes/Delete since 21 Feb, consensus is to delete. Can someone please do so and rm the listing from the talk page. -- Graham  :) 18:29, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)(moved from speedy deletions page by me. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 18:52, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)~)
    • Delete - Texture 21:05, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Can I just ask what the point is of asking (at the top of this page) to list all recipes for deletion on Talk:List of recipes/Delete if they're only going to be put back here for five days once consensus has been reached there? This article, for information, was originally listed on this page, but was moved to the recipes page as per the request above in a bid to clean this page up. Why not just forget about the list of recipes page and just list everything here anyway? -- Graham  :) 23:46, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Incidentally the page was listed on speedy deletions to bring it to the attention of a sysop, so that they could delete it. How else are we meant to bring the need for deletion of these pages to a sysop's attention? -- Graham  :) 23:49, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Yellow Pig Day - irrelevant. Was deleted before, should not have been undeleted. --Wik 19:16, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
    • It was wrongly deleted, therefore it should have been undeleted. Angela. 19:20, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
      • It was rightly deleted months ago as unencyclopedic. It was then recreated and should have been instantly deleted. --Wik 19:29, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
    • Regardless I vote for delete now. Secretlondon 19:26, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep, and get over it -- WormRunner 19:51, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. At least three W'pedians have independently wanted to create the page (afaict)... really, we should just stop by our local uni and ask the math profs there if they've heard of/celebrated this day. I'll do that on monday.  :-) --one of the three, +sj+ 21:04, 2004 Feb 27 (UTC)
      • Also might want to check the textbook Calculus by Michael Spivak in the index under the letter P. Anthony DiPierro 21:12, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete, and get over it - Texture 21:05, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. Relevant. Anthony DiPierro 21:12, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. It's about time we got this one back. Everyking 21:42, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • If y'all care about it so much, why don't you write more, to make it deserving? Mikkalai 22:20, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • David C. Kelly - a maths professor at a college. Connected with Yellow Pig Day. Secretlondon 19:38, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)
    • Explain your reasoning for every page you list here, even if you think it is obvious. - the top of the page
      • He did! It's the Yellow Scare... +sj+ 21:10, 2004 Feb 27 (UTC)
    • Delete - Texture 21:05, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Seriously, what's the policy on professors et al? Kelly's notable mostly for persevering in the development of a very unusual summer program over the past 20 years. I don't know if that's "WP Encyclopedic" or not. +sj+, not an author of this page.
    • Keep. Everyking 21:42, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • HMS Triumph (SS-93) page accidentally created due to typo on MediaWiki page. The pennant number should not have to S's and a hyphen. Article already exists at correct link. David Newton 21:46, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

February 28

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/archive_May_2004&oldid=2555074"