Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Semantic relationship

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 Speedy delete, per speedy deletion criterion G1 (Article or other page which provides no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.) and the snowball clause. Support for deletion was unanimous, if limited in scope. Nihiltres^(t.l) 01:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semantic relationship[edit]

Serves only to mystify the reader. Its supercat is non-existant. If a source is not found it is OR. Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 22:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as nonsense. Somebody may think this is english, but even for somebody who knows a little about the subject it seems to have been intended to discuss it is completely unintelligible. I mean, what does "it as a piece" on the end of the first sentence mean? JulesH 22:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Poor writing won't qualify the article for nonsense. However, no RS=OR. the_undertow ^talk 22:45, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- article fails the reverse-Turing Test; if you can't tell the difference between a human, and a random lang-bot, then it's a lang-bot. --Haemo 23:15, 19 July 2007 (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.