Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jolly Fun Pack


 * 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 Dunc|&#9786; 19:31, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Jolly Fun Pack
 '''This article (Jolly Fun Pack) is currently under attack by many prominent members of Wikipedia. Although the Jolly Fun Pack's roots are obscure, (Who knows of Charlotte, VT, where the first Jolly Fun Pack was created?) this article is not vandalism! For some reason, prominent members temporarily block me from editing pages for my contribution, as they probably will for making this text blurb here. Well this one is for all those who keep nagging me and calling me a "vandal": I'm trying to contribute, not vandalize! My intentions are the same as yours! To convey correct, conscise information to the general public! Why do you persecute me for that? You can block me from editing pages for putting this text blurb here but it will only be a lasting mark on your conscience! You will have shut up an innocent member of Wikipedia! Somebody tell me! Why is this vandalism? Why do I get punished for my contributions? If that's the way this whole "free encyclopedia" is, then it should be erased immediately because it's not free. My voice has been deleted from this encyclopedia many times! Where's the freedom in that? Exactly. There is none! There's not enough justice and peace in the world today, and we don't need people creating more problems in Wikipedia by banning someone when he tries to contribute! Block me if you must, see what I care! You are only injuring your own clean conscience! You can silence me through blocking but this message will have already been received by thousands, maybe even millions of people across the world. If I get blocked, they will turn away form you administrators because they know my plea! Someone tell me what I need to do to make this not portrayed as "vandalism"! Let justice prevail in Wikipedia! That will be all.

vanity page, check contribs by the person who created it, he made tons of pages about himself and related subjects Elfguy 4 July 2005 14:38 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete: Google = 0, neologism, crap. --Alex12 3 4 July 2005 15:27 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fuzheado | Talk 4 July 2005 15:55 (UTC)
 * Undelete It is just more information like everything else on Wikipedia 4 July 2005 12:03 (EST) (Thevenerablez)
 * Delete - unverified neologism. OpenToppedBus - My Talk July 4, 2005 16:18 (UTC)
 * Delete per Alex12 3. Dcarrano July 4, 2005 19:11 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not encyclopedic. Fernando Rizo 4 July 2005 19:26 (UTC)
 * Delete not encyclopedic. JamesBurns 5 July 2005 01:23 (UTC)
 * Comment This page has been restored after attempted deletion by Thevenerablez. Dcarrano July 6, 2005 18:32 (UTC)
 * Delete neologism, unencylopedic, not even amusing. carmeld1 8 July 2005 00:17 (UTC)
 * Someone appears to have tampered with the VfD header. I put it back up, and vote Delete. --IByte 01:30, 10 July 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.