Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celebrating science


 * 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 per WP:SNOW (not speedy). —David Eppstein (talk) 22:42, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Celebrating science

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NOTHOWTO, et al Dea  db  eef  09:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 09:40, 30 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete as a very short article lacking context, sources and general notability. Ochiwar (talk) 09:45, 30 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - I can kind of see what the creator was trying to do but such an article would need a lot of material, a proper title and a solid premise and this has nothing much at all, let alone those things. I'd be okay with a WP:TNT deletion if someone thought they could do something of value with the title, but I can't support keeping this. Stalwart 111  10:58, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per Ochiwar. GregJackP   Boomer!   11:18, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per WP:SNOW. (It's borderline WP:CSD, but none of them exactly fits.)   Sławomir Biały  (talk) 12:54, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * "Speedy delete" and "snow delete" are different. If you can't find a CSD to fit, it's better not to have a bolded "speedy delete" !vote. Ansh666 17:46, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Apparently the irony is lost on you: complaining that I didn't follow the proper bureaucratic procedure in invoking WP:SNOW. Sławomir Biały  (talk) 18:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm just saying that "speedy delete" has very precise definitions in this regard. Semantics, I know, but I feel like it's required to point this out whenever it pops up. Ansh666 21:33, 30 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Actual speedy delete per WP:CSD. I can't really figure out what the article is about - no context. Ansh666 17:46, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Actual snow delete - as I'm not really sure what it's supposed to be about, but there appears to be some kind of context to it. I think. ö   Brambleberry   of   RiverClan  21:46, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete under WP:SNOW. I would disagre with WP:A1 because (in part) it was proposed and then removed by User:Ochiwar, and because it has some context. ModelUN (talk) 21:56, 30 July 2013 (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.