Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Arcana Elestar

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 deleted and salted per discussion. It's not snowing, it's hailing! Garrett^Talk 06:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Arcana Elestar

In-Universe fancruft, Creator User:Elestar seems to be generatign a lot of fiction oriented entries, even going so far as to ask on the AfD talk that some not be deleted, as they will soon be rewwritten into a full fiction story. ThuranX 00:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and Salt along with all of the author's other work. She is vandalizing Forgotton Realms pages with made up stories about her own NWN2 character. It is a Mary Sue of no importance. Wikipedia is not a place for you to post stories about your Mary-Sues. Shimaspawn 01:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete and Salt - if there were some higher-level of expunging this from the encyclopedia, I would endorse it. Exterminatus? Purgatus? Absolutely non-notable, purely un-encyclopedic vanity editing to insert an editors personal work into an established body of material. Totally unacceptable. --Haemo 01:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Vanity article on a made-up character. Dragomiloff 02:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete and Salt per discussion. Hopefully there's a good CSD reason we can use. --Dennisthe2 02:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above and: Identical text and formatting to this wiki as well, implying a possible copyvio. Yes, most likely the copyright holder created both pages, but "most likely" isn't good enough. Wikipedia needs to avoid all possible copyright violations. -Markeer 03:14, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm more willing to go with a G3 (vandalism), per other commentary. --Dennisthe2 03:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - well, just seeing if anyone's bothering to read this far down. Yeah, these articles aren't such a good idea. How about Delete and Nu-Salt? I think we've hit our RDA of sodium by now. --Action Jackson IV 04:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I read this far down but I'm not sure if you're saying Keep or Delete, or why (in either case). -Markeer 04:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there could possibly be an argument to keep this cruft. --Action Jackson IV 05:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt, I'm forecasting a wintry mix of WP:SNOW on the horizon. Krimpet 05:29, 6 March 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.