Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of prominent MySpace members


 * 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. Mailer Diablo 01:16, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

List of prominent MySpace members
Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of data. Listcruft, forumcruft. Also OR, unless proof is provided for every assertion. User:Zoe|(talk) 00:40, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. junk.  Moe Aboulkheir 00:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. Roy  boy cr ash  fan  [[Image:Flag_of_Texas.svg|30px]] 00:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Notice also that the list doesn't include any criteria as to the degree or duration of usage, nor could that be effectively verified.  Postdlf 01:03, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above -- T B C [[Image:Confused-tpvgames.gif|18px|]] ???  ???   ??? 01:07, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, indiscriminate collection of external links, unencyclopedic. -- Kinu t /c  01:26, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Kinu. --Firsfron 01:39, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete, as a large plurality of . — Mar. 21, '06 [01:41] 
 * Delete, per common sense.--Sean Black (talk) 01:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per all. Bucketsofg 02:44, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Bucketsofg Encise 03:08, 21 March 2006 (UTC)Encise
 * Delete Ugh, nasty!! ...and per nom. --CrypticBacon 03:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - useful, but Wikipedia is not the place for this. --Khoikhoi 04:08, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - I hate to do this to any article featuring my man K-Fed, but it's a useless article. The Disco King 04:26, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator.--B.U. Football For Life|Talk 04:27, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete indiscriminate collection of external links. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 04:55, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. Large, never-finished random list of bloggers.   (aeropagitica)   06:42, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, listcruft, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. --Ter e nce Ong 10:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete; pointless, useless and downright crufty. smurray  inch   e  ster  ( User ), ( Talk ) 10:37, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, listcruft, unless having a MySpace page is somehow an important aspect in their lives and/or careers. J I P  | Talk 14:19, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * For all we know, it's something their agents or PR people do for them, without them actually participating. Postdlf 15:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Then there is even less point to this list. J I P  | Talk 15:38, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom --Focoe 15:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per every single opinion already submitted.--Isotope23 20:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, Isotope said it. ProhibitOnions 20:37, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, need I say anything more? Per nom. Oliver Keenan 20:42, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: This list is better handled by myspace.com itself. There is no encyclopedic value in this whatsoever. --Slgrandson 20:48, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge into the entry for myspace, with a reduced list. Helzagood 00:28, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Merging doesn't address the issue of OR and verifiability. User:Zoe|(talk) 17:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge Myspace side notes not worthy of being own topic Sundergod9 02:03, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Myspace is becoming more and more popular why not have an article on famous people who have them? --DragonWR12LB 06:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * KEEP I found the article to be interesting information and would argue that it goes beyond a mere list. User:JMiletic (UTC)
 * User's third edit.
 * No it isn't he just moved his vote from the middle to the bottom of the list. —This unsigned comment was added by DragonWR12LB (talk • contribs).
 * I have no idea why you think moving his vote refutes that (I moved the vote, regardless), but here are his contributions, clearly showing this to be his third edit. Postdlf 18:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep As indication of MySpace's widespread importance and popularity. It is not about the celebs, it's about MySpace. --alienman 08:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * User's 15th edit.
 * Delete Myspace itself provides a similar area for this, why is it needed here? —This unsigned comment was added by TgC (talk • contribs).
 * User's first and second edits.
 * Delete I followed afew of these and I don't think all of them are even official, for example, surely metallica would have had their name taken long before they'd have the chance to take it, and the artic monkey's one even states it's only a fan site. 84.68.119.235 19:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * IP's second edit.
 * Delete. Most are impossible to verify, and having a MySpace profile is getting to be as common as having a website. (Yes, I have contributed to this article, but MySpace has been clouding my brain lately... :) ) tregoweth 02:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete there is no use to knowing what websites those who are famous visit or use for self promo or friends Showtime203 03:24, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Or at least merge. The article shows how popular Myspace has gotten, especially to clueless users. M2K 20:14, 25 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.