Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daily Collections (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. Mailer Diablo 00:14, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Daily Collections (2nd nomination)
''This is the article's second nomination for Articles for Deletion. An archive of the original discussion is located at Articles for deletion/Daily Collections.''

As the Daily Collections is a non-notable collection of flash animations, I propose this page to be removed. The article is very unorganized and polluted with vanity information. It seems futile to clean up the text, as it is very likely the article will gradually deteriorate to its present state in the future.

From the past discussion, I have recovered the following:

Because of the above, one or more of four actions should be taken:
 * 1) Delete. The article's contents and history will be removed.
 * 2) Merge. The article will be briefly summarized and placed into Newgrounds as a short section.
 * 3) Redirect. The article will redirect to Newgrounds.
 * 4) Userfy. The article will be placed onto the user pages of the original editor, 24.109.9.205, and all primary editors.

My recommendation is to perform all four actions. Delete, merge, redirect, and userfy, all speedily if possible. -- SYCTHOS talk 00:58, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Addendum
Additionally, there was no legitimate reason to keep the article in the first discussion. All keep comments are shown below:

The only appropriate argument given was by Eleuthero, but as the "work" can be userfied, there is no need to keep the article.

Log

 * Proposal editied to include R. fiend's suggestion below. -- SYCTHOS talk 02:13, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Proposal editied to include addendum. -- SYCTHOS talk 23:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Discussion
Please post comments and suggestions below.


 * This was a redirect to Newgrounds, and that was working well. Restore the redirect and protect. I have half a mind to do this right now, but I'll wait for more comments. -R. fiend 02:08, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete article as non-notable (I don't seem to get any more than 20 unique pages, nowhere near all of which are relevant). I will support redirecting or recreation as redirect, but if we merged one article about a flash series to Newgrounds, we'd have to be fair and include every flash series in that article (the mind boggles), and I'd only be inclined to userfy if the editor(s) involved requested it. -- Saberwyn 05:53, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: We could ask the editors whether they wish to userfy, and conform with their requests. We could also allow the editors themselves to add the redirects at their discretion. -- SYCTHOS talk 23:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete this, re-create the redirect per R.fiend. Just zis Guy you know? 13:54, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect per R.fiend. --Ter e nce Ong 15:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable. --Billpg 18:31, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable website. An excellent display as to why re-nominating is and should be permitted. Lord Bob 20:14, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as nn. -- Krash (Talk) 22:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect per R. fiend. Grandmasterka 01:46, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Lord Bob. Stifle 13:55, 1 March 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.