Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non exsistant popular rating system 2006
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 delete. Mailer Diablo 05:48, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non exsistant popular rating system 2006 (sic)[edit]
Self-admitted original research; Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 23:41, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Makemi 23:46, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Original research and poorly worded. Last Avenue 23:50, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as original research. —ERcheck @ 00:11, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: original research and made up in school. - squibix(talk) 01:22, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- What makes you think this was made up in school? Are you just trying to be condescending? ×Meegs 01:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- "Made up in school" refers to Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day, where school can be replaced with college, altered mental states, etc. The point is that it's something someone just made up out of thin air. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 04:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- What makes you think this was made up in school? Are you just trying to be condescending? ×Meegs 01:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I can't tell if it's OR or if it's a description of something that Canada's really considering. The examples make me think it's the former, but even as the latter it's not useful. ×Meegs 01:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: no reference is made to anything actually being considered, so its either WP:NOR or WP:NFT -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 04:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Dora the Explorer contains some very slight inapropriate material? Oh, and it's clearly original research. --Optichan 15:05, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as per nom. Dustimagic *\o/* (talk/contribs) *\o/* 02:15, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nomination. —This user has left wikipedia 18:56 2006-02-05
- 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.