Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T-600G


 * 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. --Core desat 03:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

T-600G

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

complete nom by new editor SYSS Mouse 03:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete No notability, only one link, no references, author doesn't seem to know how to write a good article. Reywas92 Talk 03:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as unencyclopedic fancruft, major chunks of speculation and opinion, essayish/storytelling tone. Note prior speedy and prod victim. --Dhartung | Talk 03:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Speculation/fancruft/made up. Maxamegalon2000 05:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I hate it when people say "fancruft" in deletion debates, but this really is... fancruft. --Canley 05:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, Wikipedia is not a free web host for fan nonsense.-- Nydas (Talk) 09:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete It actually references "my original Wikipedia article" - which I guess means this is a recreation of a deleted article. OUT!!! Brianyoumans 19:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. For all of the above reasons.  -FisherQueen (Talk) 20:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Article could be cleaned up, but it should not be deleted. --Darth Borehd 01:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I nominated this article for deletion. A strong clean up won't fix any of the problems. elwyn5150 09:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. desertowl1026 23:45, 9 April 2007 (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.