Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LongTimeNoLust


 * 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. –  Rob e  rt  04:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

LongTimeNoLust
Speedied as unverifiable, later speedied as repost. Last time I checked, being unverifiable, wasn't cause for speedy deletion, so I'm bringing it here. - Mgm|(talk) 11:02, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete No google hits, hoax at best Josh Parris #: 12:47, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Article admits to being recreation of deleted material, is this not criteria for speedy? MNewnham 15:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Not if the initial deletion wasn't within process. - Mgm|(talk) 17:46, 19 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete Hoax. (ESkog)(Talk) 20:25, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unverifiable. Probable hoax. ManoaChild 21:54, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, speedily if possible. Stifle 22:27, 24 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.