Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dylanology


 * 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. Mo0 [ talk ] 01:17, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Dylanology
Tagged for speedy deletion with the reason Wikipedia is not a soap-box for personal philosophy. As this doesn't seem to fit the speedy criteria, I'm bringing it to AFD instead. Punkmorten 19:26, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NPOV Subjective, badly-written analysis of Dylan's poetry and lyrics. -- (aeropagitica) [[Image:Flag_of_England.svg|25px|UK]] 21:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * AJ Weberman is a famous Dylanologist. This article looks like a copyvio. I think it should be deleted as it stands, although IDylanology and even Weberman himself may well be suitable article material in another form. --kingboyk 23:50, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:NOR.  From the article: "How I (AJ Weberman) do it is often unknown even to me."  Original research, POV throughout, utter bullpatties, and nothing substantial to say.  Not encyclopedic topic nor content.  Barno 00:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as original research. &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-01-11 03:43Z 
 * Delete per above and WP:BALLS. Stifle 15:30, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete original "research". Clearly a load of cobblers. Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px|  ]] AfD? 20:15, 12 January 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.