Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meme that 911 hijackers entered through Canada


 * 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 was delete If anyone actually wants to do the merge and needs the content, I will make it available. W.marsh 00:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Meme that 911 hijackers entered through Canada


Is every last assertion/assumption/myth/urban legend/conspiracy theory/(sigh) "meme" about September 11th worthy of its own page? Wikipedia may not be paper, but this article also happens to be woefully unencyclopedic. What's next? "Meme that that kid who played Eddie Haskell grew up to be a porn star"? Raggaga 17:01, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as nominator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raggaga (talk • contribs)
 * Delete as nominator.... Although I believe this would be the second "vote" as nom voted delete per themselves. -newkai t-c 17:28, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * comment: "as nominator" is different from "per nominator". You can't !vote "as nominator" since you aren't the nom.  Xtifr tälk 01:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge if an appropriate article for this info can be found, otherwise Delete per nom. Some of the refs and cites look interesting and worth preserving somewhere, but I don't think the mere notion deserves its own article.  Xtifr tälk 01:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Concur with Xtifr: one conspiracy theory on 9/11 (or 7/7) would not necessarily merit its own page: a sourced and verified theory ought to get at least a stub-length mention on an overall page. [Incidentally, and with no disrespect to those who lost loved ones, has anyone considered how tricky the phraseology could have been, if the one attack had been 2 months earlier, or the other 4 days later?] -- Simon Cursitor


 * Delete or merge with one of the articles about 9/11 - maybe 9/11 conspiracy theories. 21:04, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge into an appropriate 9/11 article. Doesn't begin to be worth an article unto itself. --Richard 00:38, 14 November 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.