Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Banter (2nd nomination)


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Petros471 19:25, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Banter
This article was previously nominated for AfD but in a substantially shorter form, so it is neither a proposed-deletion candidate nor, IMHO, speedyable under A5. The expansion to the article, however, is largely original research and unverified claims. —C.Fred (talk) 16:43, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Support deletion: unregistered editors have frequently reverted any attempt at an encyclopedic entry to a mixture of celebrity gossip and TV comedy fancruft. They have been invited to enter something verifiable and with lexicological authority but have failed to do so. The only fragment worth retaining is more suited to Wikionary. Kevin McE 18:49, 10 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. --MaNeMeBasat 10:33, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Starionwolf 20:46, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Chrisjohnson 16:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

... Lighten up! It's just banter, mate. The Lads — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.35.96.167 (talk • contribs)


 * 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.