Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MAN-05 Gromlin: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:30, 11 January 2007

MAN-05 Gromlin

During a mass de-prodding of articles by TheFarix on Gundam related articles, I reviewed the various removals of the subst'd {{prod}} and have listed this one, the MAN-05 Gromlin for deletion, as it does not assert its own importance in the Gundam metaseries.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- SkierRMH 03:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete Oh come on. This is an encyclopedia, not an... I don't know what... this doesn't belong here whatever the case. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 01:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is more what I like to see instead of the WP:POINTed {{Prod}}ding of articles in-mass without no regard to if it should be cleaned up, merger, or deleted. --Farix (Talk) 02:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, and due to lack of sources. Edison 06:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per my nom in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AMX-104 R-Jarja. MER-C 06:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Super SPeed-Delete Yup, get rid of em all. It's an article of ONLY headlines MiracleMat 07:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per my PROD nomination. Moreschi ^Deletion! 09:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails every policy that is supposed to apply to this kind of article. --Folantin 09:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Absolutely. Akihabara 11:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no encyclopedic content at all. --Pak21 14:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While I suspect that I would vote for merge or delete were this article proposed singly, the sheer volume of recent nominations for deletion in this category makes the already short time to assess and/or improve said articles completely inadequate. Edward321 00:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 * '''Delete''' Absolutely. [[User:Akihabara|Akihabara]] 11:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * '''Delete''': no encyclopedic content at all. --[[User:Pak21|Pak21]] 14:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
+*'''Keep'''  While I suspect that I would vote for merge or delete were this article proposed singly, the sheer volume of recent nominations for deletion in this category makes the already short time to assess and/or improve said articles completely inadequate.  [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] 00:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)