Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/archive May 2004

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Votes for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JeLuF (talk | contribs) at 19:33, 3 July 2003 (Raglan Castle). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search


Please review our policy on permanent deletion before adding to this page.

Add links to unwanted page titles to the list below so that other Wikipedians can have a chance to argue for and against the removal of the page.

Please sign any suggestion for deletion (use four tildes, ~~~~, to sign with your user name and the current date).

  • If the page should be deleted, an admin will do so, and the link will be removed from this page (it will show up on the Wikipedia:Deletion log).
  • If the page should not be deleted, someone will remove the link from this page. Page titles should stay listed for a minimum of a week before a decision is made.

Don't list here...

  • page titles of stubs that at least have a decent definition and might in the future become articles. There's no reason to delete those - see Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub
  • pages that need editing - see Wikipedia:Pages needing attention
  • pages that can easily and sensibly be redirected to another page. E.g., a page called presidant (a misspelling) can be redirected to president; etc. Even misspellings can be caught by search engines and provide Wikipedia perfectly relevant traffic!
  • pages in the wrong namespace (for example, user pages in the main namespace), can be redirected and should not be deleted if there are still old links to them.
  • subpages in your own user space, use Wikipedia:Personal subpages to be deleted

Note to admins

  • As a general rule, don't delete pages you nominate for deletion. Let someone else do it.
  • Simply deleting a page does not automatically delete its talk page or any subpages. Please delete these pages first, and then the main page. Also, if you delete a page, remove it from this list as well.
  • If another solution has been found for some of these pages than deletion, leave them listed for a short while, so the original poster can see why it wasn't deleted, and what did happen to it. This will prevent reposting of the same item.

See also

Please put new items at the bottom of the page

  • Image:Glasseelu.mov: What are the feelings on use of .mov files with the GFDL? I'm not sure about format transparency here.... -- John Owens 22:31 11 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • Does anyone have the necessary conversion software? I don't even know what we would convert it to. Last time I checked we didn't have a standard format. -- Tim Starling 15:34 21 Jun 2003 (UTC)
      • I know there was talk of some format I wasn't familiar with myself, I don't remember what it was called offhand. I'm pretty sure .mov doesn't qualify no matter how you cut it, though. -- John Owens 08:53 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
        • Are you talking about Theora? -- goatasaur 05:39 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)
          • Hmm, Theora doesn't sound familiar, but the associated Xiph.org Foundation seems to ring a bell, could be. -- John Owens 05:43 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)
            • I'm not sure, then; there aren't a lot of cross-platform non-proprietary video formats around. Certainly (and unfortunately) none of exceeding popularity. -- goatasaur 05:46 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • If you can supply a transparent equivalent as well as the .mov version, then I believe that's sufficient - add dual links... Martin 10:48 30 Jun 2003 (UTC)
  • Ha Wing Ho, and Ho Fuk Yan - not too sure that these gentlemen should have an entry in the 'pedia. olivier 13:46 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • Not sure about Ho Fuk Yan, but Ha Wing Ho at least should go in my opinion. -- Schnee 20:25 23 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • Entries amount from Hong Kong Yahoo:
      • 30 entries for Professor 何福仁 (Ho Fuk-yan), some aren't even about this "renowned author in Chinese literature".
      • Principal 夏永豪 (Timothy Ha Wing-ho) has 20 entries. --Menchi 03:51 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • I agree with Schnee - Ho Fuk Yan seems valid, but if Ha Wing Ho has a reason to be in, it is not mentioned in the article yet. Andre Engels
  • image:Rvalcore.gif plus it's talk page. Appears to be self promotion for some sort of club. Does it deserve an encylopedia entry? Theresa knott 08:51 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • Non-encyclopedic, in my opinion. The Anome 08:55 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • Seconded. I'd be for deletion. -- Schnee 12:29 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)


  • Christer Pettersson, may be salvageable, but unclear whether the two items are the same person, and only Olaf Palme actually means anything to me. jimfbleak 07:15 25 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • It's legit. I vouch for it. Could be spruced up though, that much is true. Keep it. Sorry, forgot to sign -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo stick 19:40 25 Jun 2003 (UTC)
      • If you vouch for it being legit, could you please answer the question whether it is the same person, or two persons with the same name? In the first case it should be changed to a disambiguation page; in the second case it should be rewritten for style. Andre Engels
    • Let me disambiguate myself. The first mentioned Christer Petterson (a substance abusing underworld lowlife) was indeed accused of killing Olof Palme in a court of law. The other gamer activist I know nothing of. Cimon Avaro on a pogo stick 19:07 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)


  • History of the scientific method
    • A great chunk of text dropped into scientific method, which I chopped out and moved into what seemed like a suitable title. Possible copyvio. The Anome 23:37 25 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • I read it critically, and it didn't scream copyright to me. But what do I know. I would tend to keep it and expand it to cover the rediscovery of the scientific method in the occident. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 04:58 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Check the talk page. It has been attributed to Ashik Sayyid Konurbayev, but some paragraphs in his text are shared with a text from the popular "Islamic Scholar" database. -- Tim Starling 05:14 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • I'll take your word for it. Objection withdrawn. But we will need an article that covers early oriental scientific methodology, and it's role as an inspiration for the occidental rise of Science. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 12:09 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • I have renamed it to The experimental method in the Islamic World, which is clearer. It should still be deleted, though, if we cannot rewrite this with new copyright-free text. I will restore the copyvio message for now. -- The Anome 13:28 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)
  • Babylon dict, just a 3-word description and an external link. Looks like advertising to me. -- Wapcaplet 01:49 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete. Not just an ad, it's a coporate ad. The dico has to be purchased. Pathetic attempt. --Menchi 04:53 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)
  • SurJection, nothing links to it. Redirects to surjection. Looks like its only reason for being is that someone might accidentally type the word with a capital `J' in the middle of it in the searchbox. Which I think is highly unlikely -- hawthorn
  • BiJection, the same. -- hawthorn
    • CamelCase artifact. It's useless in my view. Just clutter up search results and quite distracting at that. I realize that there are CamelCase Wikilinks actually wikilinked out there, but those 2 apparently aren't. I recommend deletion, although it's not urgent. --Menchi 04:53 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • Looking at the page histories, both the above are remnants of the CamelCase days. What's the policy on those? —Paul A 04:49 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • I used to favour keeping these redirects, but apathy has struck, so I can't be bothered to oppose their deletion any more. Apathy - the great enabler :) Martin 16:10 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • Google confirms that there are no links to these URLs anywhere on the visible web. Delete. The Anome 08:16 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
  • How to learn lines - not a wikipedia article. Bill 18:29 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • There is nothing wrong with wikipedia containing procedural information. If recipes are fine, then so should be drama tips. SimonP 04:32 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)
      • Which is exactly the reason I'm against recipes on Wikipedia. This kind of information is not even nearly encyclopedic. Andre Engels 18:42 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • I dont have a problem with an article on this topic, many books have been written on this topic, it is encylopedic. But I don't think much of the article itself, the suggested memorization aid appears harder to memorize (and understand) then the text being memorized. Pizza Puzzle
  • Abstract thought - basic definitions are suspect, to say the least. Bill 18:29 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • Indeed. There is not even a real "definition" of what the article is about.
  • Dhagberg - supposed to be in the User namespace. No pages link to this page. —seav 03:28 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)


  • Please delete Image:LocMap Purnululu.PNG Kununurra incorrect. Map has been replaced. Tiles 05:15 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)


  • !!Stark Tobak!! - Doesn't contain any information, description of first (and only) edit was "!!Stark Tobak!! start of ranking project", no pages link to this. - Tobin Richard 07:01 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • This appears to be part of an attempt to label material as "parental advisory", see Stark Tobak.Why the label is in some Scandinavian language, I can't imagine. -- The Anome 07:06 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • This and Stark Tobak should be deleted. This is not even grammatically correct in any way; the German phrase is "Starker Tobak", and the Norwegian/Danish phrase would be something else entirely. --Eloquence 03:23 30 Jun 2003 (UTC)


  • 2003 in sports.
    • Jtdirl wishes to delete the history of this article.
    • Martin opposes, as history-only deletions of articles:
      • are a possible violation of the GFDL
      • are dishonest - we should cite our sources for text, just as for images
      • are disrespectful to the people who have edited the page
      • make it harder to peer review recent edits to the page
      • make it harder for people to evaluate the reliability of the page
      • are not authorised on our policy on permanent deletion of pages.
  • talk:Dago - fascinating discussion that is now incomprehensible, at least to me, since Dago was deleted. Can this go too? Martin 16:11 29 Jun 2003 (UTC)
  • [[Perovskite%A0Structure]], [[Vanga%9Ei]] - cp vio
    • Accidentally removed by G-Man (diff). Original entry follows:
      • Perovskite Structure, Vanga?i - possible copyright violation. Note these have non-standard characters and may not be linkable from this page; vfd page version from 22:53 29 Jun 2003 has working links. - Hephaestos 04:10 30 Jun 2003 (UTC)
      • These links seem to go to the right places: [[Perovskite%A0Structure]], [[Vanga%9Ei]] -- Tim Starling 06:33 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)


  • Bilderberg Conference - possible copyright infringement. And if that is sorted, I think this still needs deletion (or massive editing) for POV -- sannse 09:05 30 Jun 2003 (UTC)
  • Anthony Starita and Talk:Anthony Starita - someone please move this to the september11 wiki before I get someone mad again for deleting it. Andre Engels 12:40 30 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • I'll move then delete. But how do I move interwikily? Just c-&-p? --Menchi 16:07 30 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • I don't think we should move the Talk, it's copyvio. --Menchi 16:10 30 Jun 2003 (UTC)
  • Michael B. Tretow - Nonsense and/or a 14-year-old's idea of biting self-referential humor. - DavidWBrooks 17:18 30 Jun 2003 (UTC)
    • Delete. Michael B. Tretow doesn't reach the 5000 approximation nor has he cultural significance, he's only got 600 Googles or so. Not even close. --Menchi 17:39 30 Jun 2003 (UTC)
  • nanomedicine a collection of external links and book listings, not an encyclopedia article G-Man 18:39 30 Jun 2003 (UTC)
  • Bob and George: Is this a popular cartoon? Otherwise, this is just an article about someone's website, and Wikipedia is not a web directory. -- The Anome 08:08 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Now correct me if I am wrong, but did not both this and the David Anez pages already go through this process several weeks ago. To me they at least appear familiar titles from this page. Is there a long term archive on what article titles have already passed through Vfd? I mean theoretically someone could just resubmit the same stuff over and over again, and we would debate it here each time ab novo. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo stick
    • It was David Anez before (resolution: merge into cartoon page), now it's the cartoon page itself being offered for deletion. The scope is wider, so it's a new topic. The Anome 08:45 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • No, you misread me totally. I am talking ancient history here, several weeks ago. I recollect distinctly that both these pages were posted here, and the discussion went much the same way as this time. Except that people went around a couple of extra hoops to verify these subjects were not indeed a vital part of everyones cultural education. I may misremember, but... -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 08:58 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Did they vote to delete the cartoon page too? The Anome
    • I honestly don't remember. But it shouldn't be too hard to check out. If the page is an old one, then it probably wasn't deleted, eh? -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 09:30 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Theoretically, you should be able to find out things like this by searching the edit summaries. I just did so for the past 1500 edits (back to May 21), and the word "george" has not appeared in an edit summary in that time except in connection with this entry. There has also been only one listing for David Anez back to May 21. -- Tim Starling 13:59 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Um. I am going to eschew pointing out that I joined WikiPedia a full five weeks before May 21; instead I will go for the "misremembered" escape clause. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 16:32 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Belay that. I scanned the summaries to the end of time, and I was fully and totally mistaken. The nearest name to David Anez was Daniel Evans. Maybe that was the source of my mistake. I fully retract my allegation that David Anez was a repeat. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 18:23 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • It is NOT a "cartoon", it is a web comic, and Wikipedia does list webcomics. Ergo, I don't favor deletion. Otherwise, Megatokyo and Tsunami Channel are also fair game. Emperorbma 06:06 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
      • Additionally, it is critical to the definition of Sprite comic, since it was the one very first sprite comics, if not the first. Emperorbma
  • Miguel Sanchez - this should not have its own article. -fonzy
    • I've merged it's with Lionel Hutz and turned it into a redirect. No need to delete now Theresa knott 10:51 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • I can't even remember anything about him being "Miguel Sanchez", can somone remind me. Also I dotn think anyone would type Miguel Sanchez to get Lionel Hutz. -fonzy
The only reason I merged it was because of what was actually said on the sanchez page. I don't know if it's actually true or not. But assuming it is true, then I think it is perfectly possible that someone might type miguel sanches to get lionel Hurtz. I don't see any reason to lose the redirect, besides it's not wikipedia policy to delete redirects. Theresa knott 13:13 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)
It is true. Hutz is babysitting Lisa, who asks - "Mr Hutz, why are you burning all your personal documents?" He replies, "Lionel Hutz no longer exists. Say hello to Miguel Sanchez". Evercat 18:11 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)


  • Dick Kovacevich no idea who this is talking about G-Man 17:29 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • I googled for him. He's CEO of Wells Fargo. It's a bit of a better stub now, perhaps someone will turn into a real article.
    • --cprompt
  • Hatem Elmohandis - no Google hits, article seems to say that this person studied Islam and works in I.T. - nothing more interesting than that. Evercat 00:28 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)
  • Verboten - Dictionary definition. Can't think of any conceivable encyclopedic content that could go under that name. Delirium 04:44 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Axe It! -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 12:09 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • This is linked from List of German expressions in English, which encourages the creation of such pages, and coexists with many similar ones. Arguably, the entire list is more a thing for Wiktionary than for Wikipedia, but while it exists, I see no reason why this individual page should be removed. --Eloquence 16:53 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)
      • Ah, didn't notice that. Perhaps the list has some place in Wikipedia, as a documentation of German influence on the English language through contemporary word-borrowing (rather than common heritage). However, I don't think there need to be separate pages for these words, since that'd degenerate into a dictionary. So I'd support deleting essentially all the pages linked from that list. -- Delirium 02:21 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • I wouldn't delete them. We should move them to Wiktionary instead. Emperorbma 07:47 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia:Allwiki -- this hasn't really been touched since February, and I see no point in keeping it. Thoughts? --bdesham 02:29 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Agree - and it do'nt pass the goggle test Jensp 11:56 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
  • Friendship in Islam - contains long religious sermon posted by User:Scyrous. While having an article about friendship in Islam is not a redundant topic, the nature of this particular text is not Wikipedia suitable. It appears to have been copy & pasted from a www website . Crusadeonilliteracy 06:59 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
  • Adopting a dog - not a 'pedia article. ²¹² 09:23 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • The article as it stands, is a bit rubbishy. But in the fullness of time, with an almost complete rewrite, it could make a decent article. I think we should keep it. Theresa knott 10:38 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
  • Radical individualism - Not wikified, maybe if someone can make any sense of it, it could be fixed somehow. Perhaps someone could e-mail them, telling them, if and why the page is deleted, since they left their e-mail address... كسيپ Cyp
  • John Kahn - possible copyright violation -- JeLuF 19:22 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/archive_May_2004&oldid=1107753"