Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jacob Corbett
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was speedy deleted by User:Tony Sidaway. Sjakkalle 11:37, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Jacob Corbett[edit]
DELETED this. Patent nonsense, should have been speedied. Move along please, nothing to see. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 19:26, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Vanity if not utter BS (which I still think should be a criterion for speedy deletion; we can all detect patent nonsense, and we should also all be able to detect utter BS.) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 14:31, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. The user should be referred to Uncyclopedia instead. --Euniana/Talk 14:37, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete — RJH 15:04, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete Kevin Rector (talk) 15:07, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
- Under which criterion? That's how I knew about this in the first place -- it was marked as a speedy, but I didn't see what criteria it fit. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 17:11, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Patent Nonsense. Kevin Rector (talk) 20:38, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
- Under which criterion? That's how I knew about this in the first place -- it was marked as a speedy, but I didn't see what criteria it fit. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 17:11, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, pretty close to patent nonsense. Kappa 18:10, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete but not speedy--good call by jpgordon. Keep it up! Meelar (talk) 20:15, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, not notable, vanity. Megan1967 05:06, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.