Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of antichrists

 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. – ABCD 02:45, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

List of antichrists
What's wrong with people? Here's another antichrist: 205.188.116.69. Delete. Feydey 20:15, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * On the basis of the article as it stands, I'd have to vote delete. Deb 20:24, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh dear. Delete original research, at least... Fire Star 20:25, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Mistitled, should've been at List of possible antichrists, but it should be deleted anyway as original research without references. Mgm|(talk) 21:14, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete There shouldn't an article about list of "antichrists" or "possible antichrists" which are mostly opinion. --Anonymous Cow 21:24, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete ASAP. I don't see why this needed to break out from antichrist at all. Slac speak up!  21:44, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. Original research and libelous. Dave the Red (talk) 22:12, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * If names are corroborated (unlikely), it could be merged with Antichrist or moved to List of people accused of being the Antichrist. But probably a delete unless sourced. Meelar (talk) 23:26, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete POV nonsense. RickK 23:34, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge anything NPOV with AntiChrist, then delete. -- 8^D gab 01:13, 2005 Apr 7 (UTC)
 * Delete. I took the liberty of adding this article to BJAODN. (Well, I found the article's title funny anyway!). -- Brhaspati (talkcontribs) 02:10, 2005 Apr 7 (UTC)
 * Delete. Potentially libelous nonsense. --Angr/comhrá 04:50, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, POV nonsense. Megan1967 06:34, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Awful. What else can I say? delete. User:Ekimdrachir 00:37, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. POV advocacy (unless it is a bad joke). Besides, list of incumbents and potentates not accused to being an antichrist in one stage or another by someone would be rather short - Skysmith 07:33, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, make it a redir to Antichrist. Radiant_* 08:45, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unverifiable, arguably libelous, and I agree with Skysmith about frequency of this POV accusation. I'm not surprised that GWB and Hillary were listed, but the inclusion of Goatse Man amused me.  I don't see a need for a redirect under this title or for a BJAODN presence.  Barno 14:48, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment with respect to those concerned about libel, in the U.S. the First Amendment protects folks from being sued for libel for expressing religious opinions. I can stand on the street corner all day long saying John Smith is a sinner in the eyes of my God, and is condemned to eternity in Hell, and so forth, and there's no law that can touch me for it, because I'm expressing an article of faith, not a statement of earthbound fact. -- 8^D gab 19:44, 2005 Apr 9 (UTC)
 * Delete as currently stands on basis of POV. The fact someone added Goatse Man suggests this is either a joke article or a vandalism magnet. An interesting article on the criteria for being considered an antichrist might be worth having, assuming the sources remain historical and NPOV. 23skidoo 19:36, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete this nonsense. Everyone knows that to predict the antichrist is to jinx that prediction, and I'm looking forward to his appearance so I can get off this crazy rock. --Asriel86 23:20, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Way, way POV. Bratschetalk 04:03, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as it stands now. Dispensationalist mythology tends to generate all sorts of candidates.  The vehement rhetoric of the Protestant Reformation generated another gob of 'em.  There might be one or two good lists or articles in there.  Without more indication why anyone included is there, this list is not particularly helpful.  -- Smerdis of Tlön 16:02, 11 Apr 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.