Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HRTV


 * 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 redirect. Actually, from a strictly vote-counting POV, that may not be the case. But the redirect argument is strong, the delete argument is not ("non-notable"? May as well say "I wanna delete!"; at least one person should explain why it's non-notable), and the keep argument is really very sad indeed. Okay, so a redirect still appears to get rid of the content, so the deleters will be happy nonetheless, but I felt like making a point. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 15:02, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

HRTV
non-notable Drdisque 00:01, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The let's speedy it... Jamie 00:06, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Some people might link to it as an acronym for "High-resolution television," so I say redirect to High-definition television. Blackcats 05:16, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - I can't see how people can confuse it for HDTV, and it's non-notable. 9cds 07:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * That's acutally what I originally thought the page was when I saw it in the contents of the deletion log, and I thought to myself "why would anyone want to delete "high resolution tv". Google has 173 hits for HRTV and "high resolution.", so what the harm in having a redirect?  Blackcats 08:07, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect per above. Redirects are harmless and humans make mistakes. Saberwyn - 08:14, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or Redirect per above. Eusebeus 09:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Gtabary 11:59, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep It exists. Bensaccount 17:40, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, just because something exists doesn't make it notable, do you think there should be an article on my collection of old Montreal Expos media guides simply because they exist? -Drdisque 19:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. Jasmol 19:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect as per Saberwyn. - Wezzo 20:16, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity CDC (talk) 23:13, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete not a frequent typo. Ashibaka tock 00:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Not a typo, a misconception. Saberwyn - 08:49, 13 December 2005 (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.