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. RobertT | @ | C 00:34, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Dicdef, with no real possibility of being anything but. Mo0[talk] 23:13, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Dicdef at most. Fallsend 02:28, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no potential. Punkmorten 16:26, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Rogerd 02:36, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. It's clever though, I'll give it that much. -Haon 02:56, 14 November 2005 (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.
