Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonas "THE STEAMROLLER" Graham


 * 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 Speedy A7, performed by Gflores. -- Saberwyn 20:48, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Jonas "THE STEAMROLLER" Graham
repeatedly removed db tags for a non notable bio nomination Arundhati bakshi 19:22, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - nn, vanity Gflor e sTalk 19:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delele nn, not sure if it's vanity or attack, but either way... --Deville (Talk) 19:38, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as hoax, vanity, or attack. Take your pick. Brian G. Crawford 19:56, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom Nigelthefish 20:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Do not deleteOK. Y'all are a bunch of squares and tools.  Now, I can understand that y'all care about Wikipedia.  However, why do you have to actively go around enforcing the rules.  This should be done passively.  For example, if you're browsing along and you find the article for Heritage College (the only page this was linked to) and you look under notable alumni and you're like who is this Jonas THE STEAMROLLER Graham and then you look and you're like: "Oh.  Not worthy of a Wikipedia article. (yet!)" and so you delete it, then I would be fine with that.  But as far as I can tell, y'all have nothing to do with "Hurtige" so you do this for no point.  You're just doing this enforce the rules.  But rules are made for a reason: because breaking them causes harm to others.  But seriously: how much harm does this cause?  Think about it: how much harm does this cause?  I stole 2mb or so from Wikipedia: big deal.  Do you know how much bandwidth you're wasting by continuously going back to my page to make sure I haven't removed the "some square wants to delete this page" thing?  I'll give you an analogy here: imagine you're a cop.  Do you go around looking for people smoking weed and drinking in parks after midnight or do you go around looking out for more serious things such as assault and arson and stuff?  Of course if you see somebody smoking weed in front of children or something whilst patrolling, or if you get a call that a bunch of drunken kids are threatening to burn down houses near the park, you might go and charge them for one of those MINOR crimes. But actively pursuing the small stuff is just not worth it.  In fact, the fact that y'all care so much makes me pity you!  What do you gain from doing this?  Only a reputation  for being a stiffly stifferson, you stiffly stifferson.  Just ignore it and you'll hardly notice it.  But no...  despite the fact that you don't get paid for it, you've got to waste your time enforcing all the stupid rules and stuff that nobody cares about.  Way to go!  But I am willing to compromise: if y'all give me a week to show it off to my friends, you can delete it after that.  But until that: Do not delete!  --Mcdeltat 20:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete NOW per everyone except captain vanity. Grand  master  ka  20:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Grandmasterka: you, sir, are a loser! --Mcdeltat 20:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete: A7, no assertion of notability. -- Kinu t /c  20:19, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete and suggest (respectfully) that page creator get a life. A2Kafir 20:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've deleted it, but don't know how to close this afd. I'd appreciate it if someone could show me. Gflor e sTalk 20:29, 29 March 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.