Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The bead game
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 was delete. Anas talk? 22:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The bead game[edit]
- The bead game (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Completely unencyclopedic and unnotable. Sent to AfD because a prod was removed Iknowyourider (t c) 18:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Should probably also delete Image:P6060282.JPG, which was used in a previous version of the article. Iknowyourider (t c) 19:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Reeks of WP:MADEUP. fuzzy510 19:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Nonsense Corpx 19:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- This is not Patent Nonsense, and so is not a proper speedy delete. However, it does not look encyclopedic aor notable either. Delte, unless notability can be established through Reliable Sources added to the arricvle, which i tend to doubt. DES (talk) 19:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:NFT. The official Facebook group has all of 1 member. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 20:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unless referenced, Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day may apply. Staecker 21:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. This article has a bad case of made-up-in-school-itis. Only website listed that's relevant is on Facebook - and literally anybodycan create something on Facebook. Not even notable in the slightest. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 21:18, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
SpeedyStrong delete per WP:NFT. Also speedy the aforementioned Image:P6060282.JPG. — jammycakes (t)(c) 21:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]- Comment Please note that WP:NFT although a reason for deletion, is not a speedy deletion criterion. DES (talk) 22:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I stand corrected. — jammycakes (t)(c) 22:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Please note that WP:NFT although a reason for deletion, is not a speedy deletion criterion. DES (talk) 22:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete- Idiotic and not notable ChrisLamb 23:20, 24 June 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.