Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hazelgrim Lith'ensay

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. Shanel 02:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hazelgrim Lith'ensay[edit]

Delete. Fiction, non-encyclopaedic. ShaunES 02:48, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, no Google results --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 02:53, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
delete unencyclopedic. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 03:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - it's nonsense. ... discospinster 03:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, and offer new medication for author. -- BrownHairedGirl 04:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 04:40, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, nn. ¡Dustimagic! ^(T/C) 04:54, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP is not a bulletin board for bad original fiction. Ursula LeGuin's grocery list would make better reading than this. Fan1967 05:16, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --Khoikhoi 05:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable fiction. Hbackman 05:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom ~Linuxerist L / T 07:09, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete worthless Lankiveil 11:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. Utterly non-notable and nonsensical. Jud e (talk,contribs,email) 12:00, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, though amusing. ProhibitOnions 13:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
delete It's either nonsense or I need more coffee. Nigelthefish 17:55, 20 March 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.