Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Europe emerging as a New superpower


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 04:51, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Europe emerging as a New superpower

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This probably falls under WP:OR, but I can't find a speedy category it'll happily fit in. The two people mentioned in the article are experts in their field, but I'm concerned that the account may be pushing their views, rather than contributing for the good of the encyclopaedia. That said, there might be some salvageable material here. Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 17:11, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. JRHorse (talk) 17:15, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Perhaps I'm slow, but I'm not sure what this article is trying to say.. even with the "modified game of chicken" part. I'm curious, if, and what, others have learned from this article. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 17:31, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete It's the start of someone's essay, not an article. -- How do you turn this on (talk) 17:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Sounds like nonsense. It has nothing to do with the article title. There is already a section in potential superpowers for information related to Europe as a potential superpower. Nirvana888 (talk) 18:03, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Not even an essay, but still fits the same critereon for deletion as an essay. Also per WP:SOAP. Doc StrangeMailbox Logbook 18:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, definitely delete — perhaps this could have been speedied as a short article with definitely no context. Nyttend (talk) 18:39, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I would like to have speedied it, but AfDs are much more concrete. Speedies can be overturned easily and are not transparent, whereas AFDs explain the reasons for deletion and are more consensus-based. Furthermore, A1 (No context) states Very short articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article.  - The subject of the article is apparent here, I feel. I see your point, though! Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 21:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * See for prior discussion. Uncle G (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - no context, it's a deletable essay, original research, and Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Bart133 t c @ How's my driving? 19:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete junk. JuJube (talk) 03:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, garbage. Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 22:04, 24 October 2008 (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.