Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/6chan

 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 DELETE. jni 14:38, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

6chan
Something which doesn't exist yet is usually unencyclopedic. -- Curps 04:23, 2 Feb 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.
 * Delete. —Mar·ka·ci 04:31, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
 * Delete, not yet notable. Megan1967 05:49, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not yet and never will be extant. humblefool&reg; 06:12, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, You want to do the what now? Inter 12:23, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * One would think that. Although the wide range of encyclopaedia articles telling us all about stuff which won't exist until the 24th century rather contradicts that maxim.  It's an advertisement, yet another attempt to manipulate Google via Wikipedia in order to promote something.  I've neutered it.  Delete. Uncle G 13:58, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a web guide, especially for sites that do not exist yet. Even if it did exist, the best it could do would be to get merged with image board.   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 00:04, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. A blatant, and grammatically poor, attempt to promote a website that doesn't yet exist. The only notable thing about sites like 6chan is that they rarely come to fruition, or if they do, the creators usually get bored and don't update them anyway.
 * Delete. Jeshii 02:24, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, nn. GRider\talk  22:14, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)