Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reaction to Mel Gibson DUI incident

Reaction to Mel Gibson DUI incident

Unnecessary break-off page for a break-off page. --Emufarmers^(T/C) 10:14, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this could all be covered on Mel Gibson's main article. Konman72 11:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per above --RMHED 13:17, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete ditto --skylinec 11:10, 5 August 2006 (EST)
Merge with Mel Gibson DUI incident if this article hasn't been merged with Mel Gibson. CG 17:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and merge again (as above) Adambisset 22:18, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as per above. -- Zorro CX 22:50, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Konman and nom. And frankly, I would think the Mel Gibson DUI incident page should be reduced and merged back into Mel Gibson, but that's neither here nor there. -- H·G (^words/_works) 23:43, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Excessive forking. --Core des at talk. ^_^ 03:29, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia:Recentism at its 'finest'. Someone ought to nominate Mel Gibson DUI incident, too, this is an encyclopedia, not Wikinews. -/- Warren 04:50, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Mel Gibson DUI incident. Doesn't need its own article. 23skidoo 04:51, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. Deltabeignet 14:04, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, don't merge this ill-informed list of opinions snatched from tertiary sources ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 20:43, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not only is there the main mel gibson article, but even the more specific article of Mel Gibson DUI incident --Nick Roberts 04:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, easily can be put somewhere else if neccasary. Mphudson 13:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there should prolly be info on the reaction on the original break off page, but it shouldn't be from this one, whihc is poorly written n stuff. SECProto 02:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Mel Gibson DUI incident. I am new to this, so don't know the rules well. However, I came to Wikipedia specifically for this info. I found the main artical to be informative, and appreciated the link to this discussion page... If this is not the appropriate venue4 for discussion about the main artical, then the link should simply be corrected to point to a more appropriate place.