Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Protoverse


 * 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. It may qualify for a speedy deletion criteria or three, but there's clear support here for delete per WP:SNOW. —C.Fred (talk) 18:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Protoverse

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Poorly written to the point where I hardly know what it's talking about - PROD removed by creator — Chevvin 15:30, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - The subject of this article, in it's current state, fails verifiability and also notability as my Google search did not provide with any credible source that could assert any claim of significance. TopCipher (talk) 18:43, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Gibberish. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:07, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:08, 15 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. It is a garbage article plain and simple. Knox490 (talk) 21:25, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as gibberish. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:28, 15 April 2017 (UTC).
 * Delete Gibberish sums it up, nicely. Kleuske (talk) 14:10, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as all of the above (nonsense/gibberish/hoax/invented/no meaningful content/etc). Additionally, it looks like WP:SNOW to me.   Murph 9000  (talk) 14:33, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SNOW. I wrote a better article than that the last time I accidentally sat on my keyboard. Exemplo347 (talk) 17:52, 16 April 2017 (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.