Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ROFL Attack

ROFL Attack

For the prior VFD discussion of Roflcopter see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Roflcopter. For a discussion of potentially expanding the speedy deletion criteria to include speedily deleting material that is re-created during a VfD vote, see Wikipedia:Deletion policy/Reducing VfD load.

This is a non-notable internet game (approx. 800 google hits), possibly created as advertising. This article was created in response to the VFD discussion of Roflcopter, which see for background information. Xoloz 05:58, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, Flash vanity, advertising. — JIP | Talk 06:04, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete advertising. JamesBurns 08:07, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. You beat me to it, although I would have listed it under the rationale of wanting a clearer sign of consensus before deleting outright content that's already been listed for deletion. BTW, if this passes, remember that roflcopter is now a candidate for speedy deletion. — Phil Welch 09:13, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Conversely, if the consensus here is to keep, it may be worth considering merging the edit history of roflcopter beneath ROFL Attack, thereby fixing the copy&paste move. Uncle G 12:00, 2005 Jun 22 (UTC)
• Keep, roflcopter gets 17,400 google hits. Kappa 09:26, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • This article is ROFL Attack. Uncle G 10:31, 2005 Jun 22 (UTC)
    • But Roflcopter will be deleted if this article is. Kappa 14:11, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • roflcopter has already been discussed, and the argument to keep it lost. Uncle G 18:59, 2005 Jun 22 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable flash animation. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 11:29, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, [lame] extension of previous [lame] joke animation game. Not notable and no potential to become encyclopedic. Kappa should research and vote on current topic instead of almost-unrelated topic that inspired this one. Barno 14:03, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • The survival of information on roflcopter depends on the survival of this article. Kappa 14:31, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • That's true, but it appears very little, if anything, of Roflcopter lives on in this. My nom., at least, and many of the votes, I gather, also reflect the thinking that the redirect was not useful. Xoloz 01:19, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• I'll borrow two WTFbombs from the game and say- how is this even in here? Delete. --Scimitar 14:19, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - roflcopter only survived in the first place due to sockpuppetry Proto 14:42, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not encyclopedic. Radiant_>|< 15:15, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete for the lack of notability. Nestea 15:45, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not for an encycolpedia. .:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish 18:57, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. I wish we had a Game project. Say, Wikigamopedia. It might someday be bigger than ... well... Wikipedia (who knows). hydnjo talk 01:32, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Even though I voted for keeping ROFLCopter, I think that the ROFLcopter article pretty much covers this game as this is the ROFLcopter game... Pretty much a useless page. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 05:04, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete: I thought that this would be a sure loser, but I thought ROFLcopter was, too. Now I see that it was kept. Apparently, it takes 99% or better delete to delete something, so I'd better vote. Geogre 05:09, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)