Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of dribbling wizards
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. - Mailer Diablo 10:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- List of dribbling wizards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - (View log)
Poorly-defined criteria for inclusion; "wizard" is a rather subjective term. ~Matticus TC 12:08, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete As well as the point made by the nom, this is surely original research and unverifiable, and in any case is not particularly encyclopaedic. --John24601 12:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as per nom, wizard is subjective, as is dribbling. The Rambling Man 12:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete why do we need a list of old men with spittle on their beards? Oh, wait... Guy (Help!) 12:47, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete but add to that list of deleted articles with funny titles, if that even still exists. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Here it is. WP:DAFT I can't add it myself because I'm beyond a word-filter that blocks a page entirely if there's too many 'inappropriate' words on a page, as is apparantly the case with WP:DAFT. Do it for me, would you? -Toptomcat 13:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Thanks for finding it. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Here it is. WP:DAFT I can't add it myself because I'm beyond a word-filter that blocks a page entirely if there's too many 'inappropriate' words on a page, as is apparantly the case with WP:DAFT. Do it for me, would you? -Toptomcat 13:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Non-defined list which serves no purpose, no prejudice against a similar list which includes some criteria for inclusion and is referenced. Also, list does not contain Catweazle. QuagmireDog 14:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete For reasons above and that there seems to be no criteria for who is included in the list. Nehrams2020 20:50, 18 January 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.