Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Webkinz pets: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:17, 3 September 2007

List of Webkinz pets

Procedural nomination after a readdition of a Prod tag. Prod reasoning was: "This page is heavily changed, edited, and vandalised by IP addresses and certain users. Remember to add symbols" Michael Greiner 01:12, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, but suggest WP:RFPP if the tagger believes there is enough IP vandalism to do so, but this should not be deleted because of vandalism or even just edits. Delete. I was only opposing deletion before because of the prod tag reasoning, while this information is basically, as Crazysuit put it, a "catalog" of a toy line. I do not understand the meaning of "procedural nomination". The prod tag wasn't removed, and deletion wasn't contested. If a prod tag remains for 5 days, it can be deleted after that without an AfD, right? J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 02:30, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look in the article history. At least four times the prod tag was removed then readded by User:Superjustinbros. (example) against WP:PROD#Conflicts. Also, procedural nominations usually show that the nominator has no opinion on the deletion either way and is not involved with the article. --Michael Greiner 18:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I meant that here, the prod tag was replaced by you with an AfD tag. But I understand why you did that, because of all the prods it had seen. And thank you for clearing up the meaning of "Procedural nominations". I still do not believe that vandalism is a good enough reason for deletion. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 20:14, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete. Indiscriminate information, Wikipedia isn't an online catalog of every single animal available in a toy range. If the individual animals were notable (which they obviously aren't), then a list would be acceptable, but this doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. Crazysuit 02:52, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per not sales catalog in WP:NOT and User:Crazysuit. Not the place to list every "toy" made for every line. Corpx 04:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete I hate having to fix up this article every day. The IP address are vandalising the article every day! Superjustinbros. 11:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That isn't a good reason for deletion. It is, however, a good reason for page protection. I believe this is covered under WP:PROBLEM, because it is a surmountable problem. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 18:40, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correctable vandalism is not a deletion criterion. --Michael Greiner 18:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right. However, the article fails to comply with a policy or two, so it will probably be deleted anyway. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 20:17, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 : That isn't a good reason for deletion. It is, however, a good reason for [[WP:RFPP|page protection]]. I believe this is covered under [[WP:PROBLEM]], because it is a surmountable problem. [[User:J-stan|<font color="Black">'''J-</font><font color="Red">stan'''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:J-stan|<font color="808080">Talk</font>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/J-stan|Contribs]]</sub> 18:40, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 :*Correctable vandalism is not a [[WP:DEL#REASON|deletion criterion]]. --[[User:Michael Greiner|Michael]] [[User talk:Michael Greiner|Greiner]] 18:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
+:: Right. However, the article fails to comply with a policy or two, so it will probably be deleted anyway. [[User:J-stan|<font color="Black">'''J-</font><font color="Red">stan'''</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:J-stan|<font color="808080">Talk</font>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/J-stan|Contribs]]</sub> 20:17, 3 September 2007 (UTC)