Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enabling Act (2005)

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 16:58, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

Enabling Act (2005)
I ran into this page through a link which is creator made on Enabling Act. It looks like someone is using the Wikipedia for his power struggle in some student club. Not that no page is linked to this entry. eman 00:51, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Garbage.  An article of legislation passed by a student organization is hardly notable, unless it serves as the springboard for significant legal case, or has achieved a kind of notoriety that is highly doubtful for something just enacted this year. For the sake of good taste, I deleted the final paragraph of this article, which read, in full:
 * A final message from the Fuhrer Elect
 * Ve have you by ze throat, you pig-dogs! You vill submit to ze rule of ze one-eyed axe murderer! Nnyyyeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeess!

Enough said. --BD2412 02:57, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) The pages are also linked in a horrible way (one guys name is linked to the article on Hitler, a girls name to the article on "Dog")... Delete! And yes, there is a junkyard for interesting deleted articles somewhere. Houshuang 05:30, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * As an addendum, the subject of this article does not even appear on Google, and even the club involved only has about 500 hits. Maybe if the club had an article (it seems notable enough, having served as a pass-through for a number of UK politicians, incl. Margaret Thatcher), the current 'controversy' would rate a footnote. --BD2412 03:02, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Of course, this article contradicts Wikipedia's mission. Deletion is the correct way of handling it. However, apart from the above "message", it is quite a humourous way to vent one's anger. Do we have a graveyard for such pages? I feel it's an interesting bit of Wikipedia history. Sebastian 03:38, 2005 Feb 28 (UTC)
 * Delete this POS. The people link to crap like that too? They give Wikipedia a bad name. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:33, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete (2005). Don't students have work to do these days? sjorford &rarr;&bull;&larr; 10:00, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is just sad. Kbdank71 14:21, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'd hardly call William Hague a "glorious legacy", but there you go. Nick04 19:49, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Yuck. Jayjg (talk) 20:37, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Extreme kee^H^H^Hdelete. &mdash;RaD Man (talk) 02:05, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, IP-block, and send the page creator to a re-education camp.DS 13:55, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete and subject the writer to the tortures suffered by Erich Muehsam who was arrested after the Reichstag Fire &mdash;ExplorerCDT 00:13, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, interesting article on a notable subgroup of the official opposition party in the world's most famous University. Overall sufficiently notable. NPOV and keep. Also rename to something less deliberately provocative. 80.255 11:05, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.