Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soccer bowling

Soccer bowling was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was to delete the article. A sport existing only in the mind of one Scott Gall (see his entry above). Delete as unverifiable vanity. &#8212;No-One Jones (m) 04:42, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Note: Rugbicket and Rugbennis are other new imaginary sports by Scott Gall, can we please just apply this vote to those as well? Wolfman 18:54, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete as non-notable vanity. -- Antaeus Feldspar 04:59, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Deeeeelete Wolfman 06:22, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Drivel. Average Earthman 09:52, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. A hoax/prank. jni 13:37, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, original research. IMHO it was not intended as a prank. See Scott Gall. Apparently Scott Gall is fascinated by word combinations and neologisms which come into his mind, which he calls "codes," . In the other article he characterizes soccer bowling as "a strange form of bowling on a soccer pitch." I think this an attempt to decode one of these terms. That is, it is intended to be an extended development of the hypothetical concept of "soccer bowling," not an assertion that the game actually exists. But Wikipedia is not a vehicle for hypothetical discussions of concepts. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 14:58, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - total nonsense. The Jabberwocky makes more sense! How would you get bowling alleys on a soccer field?!?! Forgotmytea 12.06. Nov. 8, 2004
 * You'd just slithe them into place with borogoves.
 * Delete - rubbish. Niceguyjoey 15:35, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: In a sense, the mental state of the contributor should only alter the way we speak to the contributor, and not our decision. Geogre 15:46, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, along with any other "sports" this guy invents. -- Scott Burley 04:14, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect with chennis (chess/tennis). -- Chaz
 * The above edit is actually by the anon IP 198.82.71.55, and of course will not be counted.  &bull;  &rarr;  I&ntilde;g&oacute;lemo  &larr;&bull;  21:52, 2004 Nov 12 (UTC)
 * Delete, as much as I like the article, this isn't really the place for constructionist philosophy. Rje 06:49, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. --Improv 20:47, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Nonexistent, candidates for BJAODN. Delete all. - Mike Rosoft 14:06, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, this one wasn't funny. [[en:RaD Man|RaD Man (talk)]] 17:40, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Stupid wibblings of a 16 year old with an inflated ego. Kiand 16:23, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.