Jump to content

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/archive May 2004

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Votes for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Isis~enwiki (talk | contribs) at 13:40, 1 February 2003. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Add links to unwanted page titles to the list below so an online administrator can find them and check whether or not they should be deleted. Please review Wikipedia policy on permanent deletion of pages before adding to this page. If the page should be deleted, an admin will do so, and the link will be removed from this page (it will show up on the Wikipedia:Deletion log). If the page should not be deleted, someone will remove the link from this page. Page titles should stay listed for a minimum of a week before a decision is made.

If the content of a page-to-be-deleted exists on some different page, please indicate that, somehow, on the page-to-be-deleted (either by redirecting it to the correctly titled page, or, better for our purposes, putting in a link to it). To facilitate checking that a "page title to be deleted" really ought to be deleted, please don't redirect such pages to page titles to be deleted.

As a general rule, don't delete pages you nominate for deletion. Let someone else do it.

In many cases, a page does not need to be deleted. In particular, do not add page titles of stubs that at least have a decent definition and might in the future become articles. There's no reason to delete those (see Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub). Also, please don't list pages that can easily and sensibly be redirected to another page. E.g., a page called Hume can be redirected to David Hume; presidant (a misspelling) can be redirected to president; etc. Even misspellings can be caught by search engines and provide Wikipedia perfectly relevant traffic! Similarly, pages in the wrong namespace (for example, user pages in the main namespace), can be redirected and should not be deleted if there are still old links to them.

Please sign any suggestion for deletion (use four tildes, ~~~~, to sign with your user name and the current date).

NOTE to Wiki Administrators: Simply deleting a page does not automatically delete its talk page or any subpages. Please delete these pages first, and then the main page. Also, if you delete a page, remove it from this list as well.

If another solution has been found for some of these pages than deletion, leave them listed for a short while, so the original poster can see why it wasn't deleted, and what did happen to it. This will prevent reposting of the same item.

See also : Wikipedia utilities
See also : Wikipedia:Deletion log
See also : Wikipedia:Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
See also : Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub
  • Sinitic Western comparative philosophy appears to be...err... drivel. "East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet", but in atrocious prose. It's POV, it's incoherent, and it's long overdue for deletion. -- Someone else 10:54 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)
Either that or it needs a lot of work. There is' a need for an entry on the topic, but it's certainly outside my competence. Tannin
  • Images Elpsfoci.JPG/gif, Elpsmajr.JPG/gif and Elpsminr.JPG/gif (6 in all). I've replaced them with PNG images CliffTaylor 08:30 Jan 29, 2003 (CST)
  • NirvanA (CamelCase leftover) and Nirvana (disambiguation) are more useless redirects to Nirvana (which itself contains the brief disambiguation info). This means three of the five top searches for 'Nirvana' point to the same page. - Tzaquiel 03:53 Jan 29, 2003 (UTC)
  • Naked and petrified and Page widening
    • Actually, I think that the whole Slashdot trolling phenomena page should be deleted, because it's not really encyclopaedic material, but these are really "slashdot geek dictionary" entries and should definitely be deleted, especially as they're already discussed on the trolling page. Zocky 12:44 Jan 22, 2003 (UTC)
      • Well, I'm hesitant to advocate deleting these pages. They document a cultural phenomena, and I think that's reason enough to maintain them. If they were specific vanity stories, thats something else entirely; but they're not. These stories don't seem (to my perhaps already warped mind) to be harmful to the project, and give wikipedia a leg up on other online encyclopedias. my $0.02 Atorpen 04:38 Jan 23, 2003 (UTC)
        • I'll second that. If anything's going to be done, these pages should probably just be slowly merged into a more general page, such as, well, trolling (which is a bit overloaded - I think I see a project). They are significant in some small way, and I have reservations about just dumping them wholesale. - Tzaquiel 23:26 Jan 28, 2003 (UTC)
  • Anonymous Coward entry reads "An Anonymous Coward is usually refered to as an anonymous poster on Slashdot. This name is also sometimes used by trolls. "- is this an articel or just someone letting off steam (anonymously)? quercus robur 20:52 Jan 10, 2003 (UTC)
The sentence seems to be backwards. It's true that an anonymous post on slashdot is automatically attributed to "anonymous coward". But the sentence doesn't make much sense to me as written. Sannse 21:14 Jan 10, 2003 (UTC)
  • United States of America/OldPage
    • Jeronimo 00:26 Aug 27, 2002 (PDT)
      • Before it is deleted some version control needs to take place -- that page and the various CIA pages were being edited at the same time by different people. In some places the "old" page is more currently edited and in others the former CIA subpages are. --mav
  • Image:Enigma.png - This appears to be taken from www.gcsb.govt.nz/infhist.htm - according to their copyright disclaimer, the image can be used but the source and copyright status must be acknowledged.
  • JewWatch not an encyclopedia entry. --Elian
    • With another sentence or two it could qualify as a stub. Perhaps someone was planning on adding encyclopedic content? You'll note that some web sites do get an entire article. See Hot Or Not. --Ryguasu


  • File:5WPhilosophy.txt
    • Text files should not be hosted here. Also, part of the Fifth World vanity project
    • Junk, let it go Tannin 10:04 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
  • image:5thworld.jpg
    • Another bit of the Fifth World vanity project
    • Junk, let it go. Nothing links to it Tannin 10:04 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
  • [[it:Quinto Mondo]] [[es:Quinto Mundo]] [[pt:Quinto Mundo]] [[fr:Cinquième Monde]] [[de:Fünfte Welt]] [[ja:%E7%AC%AC5_%E4%B8%96%E7%95%8C]]
these appear to be multi-lingual vanity pages, part of the Fifth World vanity project
  • Image:Van.gif
    • Animated GIF; orphaned; only contibution by User:Van; no guarantee as to copyright status; am I missing something?
    • Nope, it's junk. Nothing links to it Tannin 10:04 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
  • Lilo & Stitch
    • The article reads like it was copied from another location. I've asked Zanimum twice now to let us know where he/she got the information from, but Zanimum hasn't bothered to reply. -- Zoe
    • Is a slightly reworded version of [http://starbulletin.com/2002/06/23/features/story4.html].
    • Zanimum here-- I am planning to add on to my article, but I have since responded to Zoe's query. It is a compilation of about six articles worth of information, but in my own words, nethertheless. I can go at it some more to change it, but just let me expand it to it's full size before you consider the possiblities.
  • Whites
    • I don't believe this article is necessary, especially with this title, and it's hardly NPOV. -- Zoe
  • Ottoman Reform Efforts under Selim III and Mahmoud II
    • Looks like someone's data dump of a term paper. --mav 07:39 Jan 7, 2003 (UTC)
  • The material currently being entered en masse by Pedreco from the list of micronations page is of no intrinsic value. Many of the listed micronations are defunct, and a significant proportion of the data being included in articles for those that are not is complete and utter fantasy. Wikipedia is not a work of fiction; these are fictional listings and should therefore be deleted. There *are* a tiny handful of micronations that have an extensive documented history (ie not just a badly-designed geocities web page) and some form of existence in the "real world" but they are either already dealt with in the "micronation" article, or have their own separate articles.
See this mail to WikiEN-l for a reorg suggestion. --Eloquence
  • Jabad
    • This is not the Spanish language Wikipedia. -- Zoe
  • [[Maraj%F3_micronation]]
    • Not encyclopedic, essentially orphaned
      • Started as a copyright violation/info dump, now empty, and this is the only page linking to it. As orphaned as they come. - Tzaquiel 16:23 Jan 30, 2003 (UTC)
  • Listing of noted Pagans
    • Very biased intro and list full of lesbians, sounds like pulpit raging. Not a useful page.
    • I don't get that sound. The intro can be changed if necessary. The lesbian bias may well have come from a user with a background in Dianic Wicca Martin
      • My concern is that the term 'pagan' is too poorly defined for a list to be useful. Just check out the various definitions in pagan. I'll just add a note there to attempt to prevent this. Your points about agnostics are good though. -- Hotlorp
  • Listing of noted agnostics
    • Useless page, very biased intro.
    • The intro can be changed. Example of uses: person wondering about key agnostic philosophers, or looking for common features in the lives of agnostics, or wanting not to be alone. Martin
  • Cottage Cheese Eggs
    • All recipes added with Brand name ingredients presumably copied from some other website, but all un-encylopaedic. Mintguy
      • They're all by the same muppet and should be deleted- Lisiate
    • Brand-name references are gone ; linked to from the Wikipedia Cookbook. Worth keeping. - Tzaquiel 16:23 Jan 30, 2003 (UTC)
    • copyright problem -- Tarquin 10:31 Jan 19, 2003 (UTC)
  • Thing -- 1982, nothing uses it. Likewise The Thing -- 1982 is pointed to from only one place and could likely be removed as well.
    • I agree. Nothing it redirects to even has anything to do with 1982. -- Zoe
      • As mentioned in The Thing a remake of the 1951 movie has been published in 1982. -- JeLuF 23:01 Jan 20, 2003 (UTC)
      • Exactly, so why have a link to it from an article that no one will use? No one is going to look up "The Thing" by typing in "Thing (1982)". They'll type in "The Thing" and go right where they want to
          • I have just corrected the one page (excluding this one) that did link to The Thing -- 1982, so both that and Thing -- 1982 are now unused redirects. Do unused redirects bother people? I'm not sure if there's a policy on them. -- Oliver PEREIRA 20:11 Jan 21, 2003 (UTC)
  • Medicine (shamanism)
    • most of the content is on the talk page and reads in part like an ad. for someon'es books; questions as to why this should be an article when we already have one on shamanism. -- Slrubenstein 21:04 Jan 20, 2003 (UTC)
  • Basic facts on Sweden
    • all of this information is already in the main sweden article, with the exception of the big list of memberships of dubious need.
  • Futurology
    • Just a definition "Futurology is the study of the future" and a list of lots of external links. Tokerboy
      • I am now working on this article: hopefully it will be a better article by the time you read this...
  • It's mostly geek dictionary entries plus some weirder stuff. Zocky 02:54 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
    • I disagree about some of this - 'dick' is a word with multiple uses and a history all of its own that deserves to be properly written up just as much as some of the other slang terms in the wikipedia do. KJ
    • 'dick' is a word with multiple uses and a history all of its own - exactly. So is every other word in any language. But is it an object, person, idea, concept that needs an encyclopaedic article? So far the article includes: 1. short for Richard, 2. slang for penis and 3. slang for private investigator. Do we also need articles on "Ricky", "John-Thomas" and "P.I." ? Zocky 09:49 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
        • Cryptid is worth keeping and expanding. Dick is better dealt with as a paragraph in a more general article on slang, and the rest of them are utter junk. Cryptid aside, delete the lot of them. Tannin 09:16 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
    • An article on dicks is fine. They are a subject of fascination, there are non-fiction books and museums devoted to them. I have a book with an extensive documentation of the multiple uses and history of the word ‘dick’: it's called the Oxford English Dictionary. the librarian
  • In fact most of the stuff added by [213.38.124.94]. He's been inputting external link-only articles over and over again. I'm currently trying to communicate with him.



  • Talk:Laws of anime
    • Talk of deleted article, but keep it for a while for the newbie to read it. -- JeLuF 17:10 Jan 26, 2003 (UTC)
  • 2002 State of the Union Address
    • Currently just a redirect, but this article has no links to it. The one remaining link was removed recently because it just redirects. This page has the actual text of the address sitting in the history taking up space. This redirect serves no purpose since it's orphaned.
  • SocceR - Orphaned redirect, nothing links to it. I'm not sure who would wiki this word with this capitalization.
    • This is an old CamelCase link. Articles had to be named like this in the early days of wikipedia. Keep it. There might be links out there in the internet pointing to this page -- JeLuF 21:58 Jan 28, 2003 (UTC)
      • Not according to Google, but if it must be so, then it must be so.
  • The Catholic crusade against the imagination
    • Intrinsically POV -- Zoe 20:49 Jan 29, 2003 (UTC)
    • not so intrisically POV, but the title is not well-chosen. If there really was a "fight" of the catholic church against imagination at some time in history (as the article claims), it deserves an article, so I vote against deletion (but in favour of renaming). (Unless of course there's never be such a fight). --FvdP 20:59 Jan 29, 2003 (UTC)
  • Rana. Would someone who understands this language (Swedish ? Dutch ?) maybe see to its worthiness and move it or dump it as appropriate ? - Tzaquiel 23:12 Jan 29, 2003 (UTC)
  • ChesS
    • CamelCase leftover. Nothing links here. Eric119 05:53 Jan 30, 2003 (UTC)
    • Why not keep it in case someone once added it to their favourites, or linked to it on their website? Martin
  • Ice crystal Entire contents: An Ice crystal is precipitation consisting of small, slowly falling crystals of ice. plus an external link to the same sentence. Tannin 07:15 Jan 30, 2003 (UTC)
  • AmericaN
    • CamelCase leftover. No links. - sannse 09:44 Jan 30, 2003 (UTC)
    • Why not keep it in case someone once added it to their favourites, or linked to it on their website? Martin
    • By that reasoning, we should never delete anything. But I always search (in Wikipedia and IE browser) in all lower case, and it works, so I suggest most searches are not case-sensitive. -- isis 13:40 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)
  • Totò
    • Complete contents : a dog in the wizard of oz. - Tzaquiel 21:28 Jan 30, 2003 (UTC)
  • Supply and Demand
    • The author might've been unaware of Supply and demand. - Tzaquiel 22:21 Jan 30, 2003 (UTC)
    • changed to redirects - they have nine wikipedia links between them, all seemingly relevant, so lets keep.
  • James Baldwin
    • Possible copyright violation. --mav 03:06 Jan 31, 2003 (UTC)
      • Please don't delete that; I just stubbed it. Only slightly better than nothing, and it needs attention from someone with more knowledge of him & more time to write about him (and more than one crappy set of old notes to write it from) but he certainly deserves an article. Koyaanis Qatsi
  • EcheloN
    • More CamelCase goodness. No links.
    • Why not keep it in case someone once added it to their favourites, or linked to it on their website? Martin
      • Highly unlikely since the redir was broken until long after the CamelCase transition. --Eloquence 12:38 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)
  • Genital erogenous zone We don't need 17,293 different badly written, horny-adolescent entries on anything remotely related to sex that nothing much links to anyway. Tannin
  • Genital Erogenous Zones Ditto. Tannin 13:39 Jan 31, 2003 (UTC)
    • I say keep, move to erogenous zone, and edit. If wikipedia can harness the power of horny adolescents, so much the better.
    • But why? It has no content that isn't already duplicated in about seven other places. It's just junk. The only power that horny adolescents seem to have (if we are to go by the evidence before us) is to fill Recent Changes up with trash articles and make the whole of Wikipedia look like a bunch of horny adolescents. Tannin
  • Ashington , possible copyright infringement http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/vg/wansbeck.html 62.30.150.99 14:57 Jan 31, 2003 (UTC)
  • Aleatory, a spirited newby experiment on an English adjective, Zocky 19:58 Jan 31, 2003 (UTC)
  • Samoyed -- it's about derogatory terms, not about "Samoyeds", and it's inaccurate about what's derogatory, too. -- isis 02:54 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)

I would like to remind folks who actually delete a page to remove the request entry on this page. This will keep the length of this page manageable. Thanks! David

The entry should stay for a little time to document the discussion leading to the deletion. -- JeLuF 20:11 Jan 23, 2003 (UTC)

Of course, that is true. However, look at the length of this page! It makes no sense. If most of these pages have been deleted, the corresponding entries on this page should be deleted. But the world doesn't always work in the way that I think is obvious. David 17:21 Jan 28, 2003 (UTC)

    • also The Bretrix- same nonsense, different spelling... (Unforunately, nobody can be told what tHe Bretrix is... you must see it for yourself ) quercus robur 11:31 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/archive_May_2004&oldid=636152"