Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Federer's playing style

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. I don't see anything here that isn't in the main article that is of use. Woohookitty 08:56, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Roger Federer's playing style
The original text is a complete verbatim copy of a federer fan blog post: (which now lists Wikipedia as a "mirror site" for his article). Some information should be merged into Roger Federer, but obviously only the extremely notable aspects of his game. The rest could be covered by a link to the blogpost from the federer article, if necessary. As only the Roger Federer article and one user's page link to the article, a redirect is unnecessary. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:59, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge any relevant information and Delete without redirect . --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:59, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Please read Guide to deletion. You cannot delete the history while merging the content. GFDL requires attribution to remain. - Mgm|(talk) 18:40, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ahh I see. Well, merge then...  --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 18:49, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * If a redirect title is objectionable, it can itself be renamed while retaining history (say, to Roger federer, or over the historyless redirect Federer). Failing that, it can be moved into the talk namespace, with a notice on the talk page ("This article contains text merged from Talk:Roger Federer/history.").  There's no reason to preserve useless redirect names like this. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 23:22, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't oppose a move to the talk namespace of Roger Federer if it needs to be merged. as long as the history is retained. - Mgm|(talk) 09:22, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Copyvio. Gamaliel 23:14, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, copyvio. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 23:22, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't know what I was thinking - if the blog author is linking it as a mirror, he clearly has no objection to it being here. Merge relevant parts per DropDeadGorgias and move to Roger federer or Federer or the talk namespace to preserve history and redirect from there.  Delete the resulting redirect at Roger Federer's playing style. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 05:48, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Turnstep 11:54, September 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * I disagree that the article should be deleted. There is truly nothing offensive about it and the mere fact that it is "mirrored" by another site is not enough to delete it.  Wikipedia is a place to gather information on anything and everything.  It is a valuable learning and researching tool and this article maintains that tradition. User:krocha12345
 * Krocha12345's seventh edit. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 04:06, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * It is agood articale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.127.53.56 (talk • contribs) 05:16, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * This is a VERY valuable article. A lot of information available on Wikipedia can be found somewhere else but to make Wikipedia a true encyclopedia, I believe it should be kept. Let's keep it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.71.60.88 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * This is a great article!!! WHY delete it? - Dave, New York — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.59.135.67 (talk • contribs) 03:55, 12 September 2005  (UTC)
 * This is the best tennis article I've read. Perhaps just rehash it? - Tom, NZ222.152.214.83 05:20, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * This article is very good and should be kept alive, even though it is mirrored.
 * If Pete Sampras, John McEnroe or Björn Borg with their merits do not have article like this. This should be deleted. And I'm not talking about potential (Formula 1 language). I'm talking about the merits. I suppose one could write a bunch of these type of articles from ANY of the players mentioned before. Thank You Fanatics.
 * 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.