Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concierge service

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 Speedy redirected to Concierge. Dpbsmith (talk) 14:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concierge service[edit]

No need to have this - we already have Concierge. I tried to make a (rather unimportant) redirect from it several times, but a user constantly changes the redirect into the article containing an advertisement for his service. So I think that this should be deleted as not useful and misused for spamming purposes. Ioannes Pragensis 08:38, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Concierge is a better article, although it needs tidying. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 10:02, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Concierge. Pretty much a duplicate of whats already here. Ydam 10:30, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Ydam; it may also need protecting. Extraordinary Machine 13:20, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Concierge Missvain 16:36, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect (and protect) per above. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 18:21, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy redirect to Concierge. Dpbsmith (talk) 02:03, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect The article is not written in an encylopedic style, and Concierge is a more logical title. Any edits should be made in Concierge. --Transfinite 04:11, 16 June 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.