Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NATO at the 2004 Summer Olympics

NATO at the 2004 Summer Olympics
Huh? Are they nearly the same? Mikkalai 05:38, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * No idea about the intentions that were at the origin of this article. Even if I think I saw some clues, I'm not Sherlock and might be mistaken. Anyway I decided to add my modest contribution and play the game. And frankly, keep or delete, I don't care, except that I would hesitate to encourage the VfD craze, and my natural tendency could be in the end to vote for why not keep. --Pgreenfinch 07:25, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete'. Original research and pretty pointless at that. --G Rutter 08:27, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * delete pointless crap --Jiang 09:04, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. I can see no merit in this whatsoever. Average Earthman 09:09, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. What a conundrum for Pgreenfinch!  Either vote delete, as it is obvious, and set a precedent for his pet article European Union at the 2004 Summer Olympics; or vote keep, and be seen to support a ridiculous article! -- Chuq 12:19, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * No problem, dear Chuq, and thanks for caring about my well-being, and also for the fun. I enjoy this trap that is only a trap in the eyes of the trapper. Just remember the -stan case, which was built as a trap also, but which article at the end was kept. Fun, wasn'it? Well, now I just watch, I might be needed as the famed swing voter, although it doesn't seem so, but it is the most comfortable situation, believe me ;-)) --Pgreenfinch 12:57, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ambi 13:02, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Utterly pointless (particularly as the membership of the EU and NATO substantially overlap). -- Necrothesp 13:09, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Complete waste of time, by an IP with an interesting history, my guess is that it is an attempt to prove a point. Andrewa 14:22, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep if European union stays The article proves it's point well, if european union at the 2004 summer olympics stays then it sets a precedent that this has to stay too(although the article could use signficent cleaning up). Edit: The article is bloody brillant now, keep it. Chuckf
 * If even its creator, doesn't consider it noteworthy enough to vote to keep, then it's time to speedy delete it. And as a mostly sidenote, the article doesn't prove any point -- I remember no suggestion by top NATO officials about the NATO teams competing under one flag for example, nor have multiple sources cared to make this same calculation. Aris Katsaris 16:13, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is vandalism of Wikipedia in order to make a point in an argument. See here: As such it's time to delete the article and start contemplating restrictions on the idiot who abuses the system of Wikipedia and wastes our time just in order to win some sort of pissing contest. Aris Katsaris 16:13, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: joke. Wile E. Heresiarch 16:17, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Please don't create joke articles to "prove a point". Goodness knows I've been tempted sometimes, though...   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 21:11, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't care whether we keep the article or not, but it should certainly be where I have moved it at NATO at the 2004 Summer Olympics.--Samuel J. Howard 00:27, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * I for one can't wait to find out how NATO performed against the Commonwealth. Delete Dsmdgold 04:29, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is a joke about the "keep" decision for European Union at the 2004 Summer Olympics. Also the EU is mostly a subset of NATO. Alfio 12:36, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Makes as much sense as the EU at the Olympics page.  We're being inconsistant if we get rid of this.  RickK 04:57, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Definitely a joke article with no clear objective. --*drew 07:15, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't see how we can delete this while keeping the EU article. It is no less valid in the context of the Olympics. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 05:30, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Well thought, Cyrius, you convinced me. All the more as this brillant Nato results, which we should congratulate, would not have been possible without the oustanding contribution from the athletes of the EU (60% of the Nato medals). With that interesting precision, the article is now a pure jewell. My "why not keep" vote becomes "strong keep" ;-)). --Pgreenfinch 07:20, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Original research. D AVODD  [[User_talk:Davodd|« TALK »]] 22:04, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pointless, all it does is add up all of the NATO medals and compares them to the EU totals of medals, which is not worthy info. Also since some of the EU is in the NATO, so it overlaps. Colonel Cow 00:18, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)