Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick, Derek, and Andrew's Report on the Ethos of Wikipedia


 * 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   speedily deleted as vandalism (WP:CSD). -- Merope 19:53, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Patrick, Derek, and Andrew's Report on the Ethos of Wikipedia

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Obviously violates WP:NOR, as the article states that it is original research conducted by those three people. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 18:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. The fact that the subject of this investigation is Wikipedia itself is neither here nor there; what is relevant is that it is a piece of original research and a non-notable report. Sam Blacketer 18:52, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Previous edits by the user contained vandalism, so either this is all a prank or Wikipedia is being used as a guinea pig. WP:NOT a guinea pig. Guinea pigs are much smaller. Chris Cunningham 18:57, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * And more cute! --Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 19:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as blatant original research. GlassCobra 18:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per WP:NOR since I suppose as nominator I get to cast a vote too. --Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 19:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Evb's report on this article's violations in order of appearance: WP:OR, WP:POV and WP:CBALL. Recommendation: Delete. --Evb-wiki 19:02, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * very funny, but please Delete. Bearian 19:40, 24 October 2007 (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.