Vero - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Forbes

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Procedural close. Orphaned AFD. I'm not even certain it's the same suject as the current article. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:20, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Andrew Forbes

Vanity. --fvw* 18:11, 2005 Jan 6 (UTC)

• Delete, unsuccessful attempt at humour.-gadfium 19:32, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable, despite two Black Belt wikilinks. Egil 19:51, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete OneGuy 20:26, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, vanity plus fiction, could be a speedy. Wyss 03:58, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Nonsense. Please take an eye on black belt to revert edits there by the author of this fiction. jni 07:19, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep A good example of bullshit as so very kindly pointed out by jni --217.42.104.35 16:05, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Usefull, accurate and up-to-date, cheers mate - Unsigned comment from 81.154.133.134
• Delete vanity. Funny, but more appropriate for a user page. --Deathphoenix 20:55, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable. Megan1967 02:15, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, obviously. Josh Cherry 15:09, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep A vital chapter of Cumbrian history. --66.249.64.36 17:08, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC) - vote from 62.254.64.13, fake signature added by 62.254.64.12, author of the article
• Keep --81.155.222.222 11:51, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• delete Yuckfoo 04:45, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep not notable but funny and someone has obviously taken time to contribute to this site --81.152.252.95 16:56, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable. Jayjg | (Talk) 19:51, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• delete; also, kill the sockpuppets. Dunc|☺ 20:10, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep i use wiki for college assignments, but it was nice to see something that cheered me up whilst i work sock puppets seemed ok, too kinda pointless but very informative --217.42.104.56 17:43, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- DCEdwards1966 20:25, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and take the talking hosiery with it. - Lucky 6.9 21:20, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep If verified, notable. Salazar 21:45, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Lame nonsense. Gamaliel 22:26, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

NOTE: 81.154.133.134, 81.155.222.222, 62.254.64.13, 81.152.252.95, 217.42.104.56 all originate from the same service provider as 62.254.64.12, author of the article. Gamaliel 22:37, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. This guy seems to be Lord of the Sockpuppets. Carrp 00:20, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.