Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of comic book clichés (2nd nomination)

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 was delete.--Kchase T 05:54, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of comic book clichés[edit]

Delete - suffers from fatal POV and OR problems. Otto4711 14:52, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Annihilate useless irrecoverably OR/POV listcruft. - ∅ (∅), 16:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. OR. Mig ^(Talk) 16:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. -- IslaySolomon | talk 16:59, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It original research WP:OR for the most part, fails verifiability WP:V on the majority of the entries. Its fairly amusing but completely unencyclopedic. As mentioned, there are also POV issues. --Eqdoktor 18:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stand-up comedy clichés and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of cliches. I like reading these kind of articles, but Wikipedia is not the place for them. Wavy G 20:56, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete to vague of a standard for inclusion and everything added is original research or from non-notable sources. Koweja 22:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete OR. --Tone 23:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- ...Or WHAT??? Wavy G 23:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - OR in this context means original research, which isn't permitted. Koweja 01:44, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yeah. That was actually supposed to be a joke. Sorry it wasn't funnier, I guess. Wavy G 16:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - Don't worry, it made me laugh. -- IslaySolomon | talk 03:06, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        Sorry about that. Koweja 03:25, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete more clichecruft. Danny Lilithborne 00:31, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete POV/OR cruft. Doczilla 09:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep ... it'd just come back from the dead anyway when they start the numbering over~~ What of this can be verified is already in better articles without the overburdening OR. Delete.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Serpent's Choice (talk • contribs)
Delete Oridinal research. Cnriaczoy42 16:15, 11 December 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.