Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Creighton the Cretin (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MuZemike (talk | contribs) at 02:07, 10 October 2008 (→‎Creighton the Cretin: G4). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Creighton the Cretin

Creighton the Cretin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Unremarkable comic. No wanting to start an edit war here, so here's the afd.

LAAFansign review 01:14, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - What exactly does unremarkable mean? This seems a lot like WP:IDONTLIKEIT. If this is your only reason for deletion, then I must say this a not a very good AfD nomination. Also, where did your comment on edit warring come from? If you are talking about when I removed the PROD, then per WP:Proposed deletion#Conflicts, you aren't allowed to add it back anyways. In any case, although I might support your notion that the article should be deleted (it is incredibly in-universe with no reliable sources to indicate notability), your nomination statement of "Unremarkable comic." has much to be desired. Artichoker[talk] 01:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • very weak delete hard to tell. What's with that references section? Thinboy00 @104, i.e. 01:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete appears to have been deleted by AfD consensus just a couple weeks ago. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 01:50, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. -- —G716 <T·C> 01:58, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete (G4) — Recreation of material deleted per AfD. I don't know what else is there to explain here. Creator should've went to DRV first instead of recreating the article. MuZemike (talk) 02:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]