Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryker's Island


 * 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   redirect to Rikers Island. Cirt (talk) 00:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Ryker's Island
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Since various users will not read what is availible, I hope they take time to read this: Whether a subject deserves an article or not is based upon WP:N, a policy this article fails to meet. —  Dæ dαlusContribs /Improve 01:01, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - care to come up with a more appropriate reason for deletion than WP:IDONTLIKEIT? Grutness...wha?  01:16, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply That isn't my reason. I do not honestly see why this derveres an article, there isn't even a claim of notability.  A merge might be possible to the parent, but otherwise, notability is not inherited.—  Dæ dαlusContribs /Improve 01:41, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * changing to Weak delete, now that a real reason for deletion has been posted. Grutness...wha?  06:45, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep since the nom hasn't given a reason for the AfD apart from WP:IDONTLIKEIT. If it's a merge you're after, then be bold and do it. Delete, article fails to meet notability guidelines.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 01:51, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply - Did you not read? I just said it makes not claim of notability.—  Dæ dαlusContribs /Improve 01:52, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply - Yes I did read it, thank you very much, and at the time you didn't mention anything about notability. What you did say, before you changed it (and I cut 'n paste for clarity), "I do not see why this place deserves it's own article", which is a clear case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 02:52, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply - Actually, that is not a clear cut case, yes, I was vague, but stating that I not see why it deserves an article could be interpreted as many things. At the time of writing this, my interpretation was that it did not meet WP's inclusion policy.—  Dæ dαlusContribs /Improve 03:02, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It would have been useful if you'd actually said that. Even if you feel that it's clear why something is deletable, you should still make your reasoning clear when nominating. Grutness...wha?  06:45, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

This article is about a fictional version of a prison in a comic-book universe. There is no article on a person to redirect to, therefore I removed the comment as vandalism.—  Dæ dαlusContribs /Improve 21:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete--I also don't see any reason for this article remaining. There is no notability, this stuff is fictional, and if it needs to exist, it needs to do so under the parent. Drmies (talk) 02:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as purely in-universe with no outside notability. Might potentially be a transwiki candidate to if anybody is so inclined. RayAYang (talk) 04:56, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Rikers Island as a plausible misspelling. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:31, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * redirect to the real prison. `70.55.200.131 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 07:59, 17 October 2008 (UTC).
 * Comment this opinion was deleted by user:Daedalus969 under a false accusation of vandalism. 70.55.200.131 (talk) 11:03, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note -- Apparently I cannot read.—  Dæ dαlusContribs /Improve 21:40, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Redirect to the real prison. Parsecboy (talk) 12:09, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * delete and creat redirect per above. no notability for this fictional one outside it's fictional universe.Yobmod (talk) 10:31, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * redirect per WP:BEFORE, as plausible search term AND plausible misspelling. We don't need to discuss every single redirect at AFD. Neier (talk) 12:44, 21 October 2008 (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.