Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Streetsus


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Flowerparty ☀ 00:25, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Streetsus
WP:NOT a collection of indiscriminate information. Self-admits it is about nothing. &mdash; WCityMike (T  &dArr; plz reply HERE (why?) &dArr;  23:56, 5 June 2006 (UTC) Thanks for the 'nice' comments, but I'll only take the first one (on indiscriminate information) into account, and not much taking into account this encyclopaedia includes a version in Klingon (very 'existent' information, yeah). Of course you English speakers know it is NOT a word, a pretty obvious piece of knowledge many non-English speakers do NOT have. That's why I got the idea of including it, after finding 1100 occurrences in Google and many (non-English speakers) people looking it up in dictionaries. It is my only and last try to include something in here, after watching the encouraging and constructive comments you devote to contributions. Anyway, let me just share another piece of knowledge that you nice brainy English-speakers do NOT have but might find useful one day: lakhu lakhara, ben zonot.
 * Delete the most useless article I have ever encountered to date, without doubt. At least some BIO articles are for people who might be famous one day and most self-promotions and BJAODNs are badly written enough to warrant a laugh, but honestly, do people even use their brains in these dark times? SM247 00:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. "It is in fact nonexistent" about sums it up.  KleenupKrew 00:31, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Deletsuss. here, I made up a word. ~ trialsanderrors 06:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Street-suss? Kick it to the kerb. -- GWO
 * www.urbandictionary.com Have a nice day. ~ trialsanderrors 17:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Commentsus you aim is laudable, but it is not notable enough a misconception to merit its own page. SM247 01:47, 8 June 2006 (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.