Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acadame north

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Deleted by acclamation. Just zis Guy you know? 21:11, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Acadame north

Not notable; listing here mainly to resolve the back and forth that seems to be going on between the article's creator and JChap2007. RidG ^Talk/_{Contributions} 00:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Is this even real? --Riley 00:38, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:BOLLOCKS and WP:BJADON. --Bill (who is cool!) 00:44, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Let commonsense prevail (which is why I am not using any of the half-a-dozen jokes I have to go here). --Richhoncho 00:46, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete definitely a bollock. Emc² (CONTACT ME) 00:47, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nothing on Google - possible hoax -- Alias Flood 00:48, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:V. SM247^{My Talk} 01:34, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and ban creator for frequent violation of WP:POINT. Danny Lilithborne 01:40, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Danny, I am curious what specific violations of WP:POINT had occurred. The author is quite definitely guilty of vandalism, such as removing AfD tags and removing talk page entries (for which I did leave appropriate warnings), but what point was he/she trying to make? RidG ^Talk/_{Contributions} 01:44, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno... Wikipedia is communist? I'm sure he believes he has a point, considering his choice of articles to vandalize. Danny Lilithborne 02:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having a point to ones arguments does not violate WP:POINT. Please do not go around slinging off WP policy docs as random buckshot in AfD discussions. If it does not in a definable and arguable sense meet the criterion, please don't list it in the AfD discussion. Georgewilliamherbert 10:28, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, my bad, I was confusing one vandal for another. It was another user on an unrelated AfD that was doing the POINT vandalism. Sorry. Danny Lilithborne 12:36, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete nonsense --Xrblsnggt 02:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete Article is like personal page. Article is also non-notable.*~Daniel~* ☎ 04:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, non-notable nonsense. --Core des at talk. o.o;; 05:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Hogwash. ~ trialsanderrors 08:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn micronation Computerjoe 's talk 11:38, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as this page is nonsense. It keeps getting recreated after deletion, so banning the author (who has the same name as the page) as a persistent vandal may be in order as well. JChap 11:41, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as patent nonsense. NawlinWiki 16:11, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt the earth. A micronation that exists on a freewebs page? Puh-leaze. Fan-1967 20:20, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as this is total trash, and there is no mention of this on the internet except the wiki posts and two other random postings made by the writer about the "nation". If I all of the sudden decided I wanted my own nation, that doesn't mean it should go in a dictionary. This is what this basically is. Arod14 20:45, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wasn't this one up for deleteion last week? --DarkAudit 20:51, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.