Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Riverfolk

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:47, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Riverfolk

This is almost an attack page. The article is little more than a dictionary definition. The term is not sourced, and even given the benefit of the doubt it would be a regional slang term that is of no value to an encyclopedia. Richard Cavell (talk) 23:40, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I was unable to find any reliable sources confirming the importance of this term or giving any context for it. I am open to changing my mind if better sources and more information is added. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete - Attack page, little context, no sources, no verifiability; apparent hoax/vandalism. AlexTiefling (talk) 00:10, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While I don't see what Alex is seeing in this entry, I do believe it is a dictionary definition without chance of expansion. Historically, people tend to live near rivers because it is a invaluable source of water and that fact is most likely already covered in articles on early settlements. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to whatever article contains info on mythological creatures inhabiting rivers. To me, this term refers to river spirits. 76.66.195.63 (talk) 12:36, 21 November 2008 (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.