Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Admins Helping Admins


 * 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 delete. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 02:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Admins Helping Admins
Prod removed by author. Article is vainspamvertisment. Wildthing61476 16:41, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:VAIN, WP:SPAM. --Porqin 16:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delte AdamBiswanger1 16:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep it, It's a FREE site that helps alot of peopleFireBob517--FireBob517 17:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment The above comment was by the article's author. Wildthing61476 17:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Nonetheless, with only contributions relating to this article / afd. --Porqin 17:12, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * '''None of your comments have any merit. You have given no valid reasons to delete thisFireBob517--FireBob517 17:16, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment Violating WP:VAIN and WP:SPAM isn't enough of a reason? You're lucky the article hasn't been speedily deleted. Wildthing61476 17:18, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong speedy delete, per nom and recommend that user have a good slap on the wrist. HawkerTyphoon 17:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Providing more time is given, this article can be re-written. It can be blanked temporarily if required. --Yup 1 17:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * ''Note: This user has 4 edits to the Wikipedia, all include relationship to this article. --Porqin 18:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I see nothing in the article that violates anything.. It's against rules to tell about a free help site and what they offer people? Have any of you actually browsed through some of the bogus listings on wiki?--FireBob517 17:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete If there are "bogus" listings, please feel free to start AFD proceedings on them.  Now, about this site, it not only fails WP:VAIN and WP:SPAM but also fails WP:WEB.  Should hitting the trifecta be a valid reason for a speedy?  Dipics 18:07, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:WEB -- Kungfu Adam ( talk ) 18:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, spamvertising. Feel free to post other "bogus listings" for deletion. NawlinWiki 18:21, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Is the article as it is stands now eligible to be removed from the Deletion queue? -Jedifans 19:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately no, it still fails WP:WEB Wildthing61476 19:29, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:WEB, and Alexa rank is 5,794,657. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  22:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:SPAM -- MECU ≈ talk 00:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:WEB. -- Kinu t /c  00:48, 27 July 2006 (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.