Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A look At History Of American, Celebrating


 * 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 speedily deleted by  per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) • Gene93k (talk) 02:15, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

A look At History Of American, Celebrating

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Written like an essay. I can't even tell what this article is about, and it's likely not notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia. &mdash; Music1201  talk  07:58, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete - Per WP:G3 "blatant and obvious misinformation". Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass (which the editor mis-spelled) never got married to each other. The article is just gobbledygook. — Maile  (talk) 12:38, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete G3. This looks like an intentionally bad translation of a foreign-language version of Black history month (Dark Record 30 days). "Martin Luther Master Jr" for King, etc. I might call it a good-faith-yet-bad-translation if not for "Chief executive honda" for "President Ford", which to me blows the deal. Crow  Caw  15:35, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. No sources. The main subject is not even clear. GabeIglesia (talk) 16:34, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete patent nonsense. Even if we're talking about a notable topic, it would need to be completely redone. clpo13(talk) 19:25, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete I think it may be a very poor machine translation of an attempt to write something about Black History Month. Since it's an article about an existing topic, with a title that is not a plausible redirect, I wonder if it could qualify for deletion per WP:A10? Mduvekot (talk) 21:51, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * A10 would certainly seem to apply. Crow  Caw  21:55, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


 * SNOW Delete as I've been noticing these recently, I believe it's simply that users misunderstand Wikipedia and haven't examined closely how articles are better acceptable. SwisterTwister   talk  05:30, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete, hilarious yet incomprehensible. GABHello! 20:44, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedied, I don't think it should sit around for several more days. Looking up the creator, I found a new article by them, An Efficient Strategy in Capturing Drug Users, and speedied that as well. I've encouraged the user to go via AFC. Bishonen &#124; talk 20:51, 7 April 2016 (UTC).
 * I think this nomination template needs to be closed, so it shows on the AFD stats. Yes? — Maile (talk) 20:54, 8 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, indeed, but I don't think I should both speedy and close, I prefer somebody else does the close. It doesn't have to be an admin. Bishonen &#124; talk 21:45, 8 April 2016 (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.