Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The 9/11 REcommission Report


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 14:34, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

The 9/11 REcommission Report

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Promotional; non-notable Tom Harrison Talk 13:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conspiracy theories-related deletions.   -- Tom Harrison Talk 13:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. No reliable sources quoted.  If actually mentioned in some of the references (other than Alex Jones), might deserve a section in Groups and individuals challenging the official account of 9/11, but no sign of adequate notability for an article.  &mdash; Arthur Rubin |  (talk) 17:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong delete The only assertion of media coverage was from Alex Jones, a 9.11 conspiracy insider, and from a proposed event in Nov. 2007. With no outside coverage, it fails notability.  By the way, if it's kept, put in a wikilink for Matthew Arnold (ha ha) :). YechielMan 18:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete seems to be nothing but spam --rogerd 19:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete no WP:RS for WP:N or WP:A. Leuko 19:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above.--MONGO 00:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. --Haemo 01:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete - Spam.--Bryson 02:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Non-notable? This sentence in the article clearly shows notability: "The report has been placed in such media circles as the many websites, radio talk shows, and TV."  Oh wait, nevermind...Delete.  Pablothegreat85 04:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into Groups and individuals challenging the official account of 9/11 Cloveoil 12:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete with prejudice. Periodically we have to go through the 9/11-related articles and delete Alex Jones-promoted Vanispamcruftisement such as this.  Wikipedia should not be used to promote the sales of otherwise non-notable conspiracy theory propaganda.    MortonDevonshire  Yo  · 18:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, no reliable sources, spam. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 05:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable spam advertisement for cruft. JungleCat    Shiny! / Oohhh!  18:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Per Morton and NuclearUmpf. --Tbeatty 00:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Pointless and no citations for anything it says. Just a few links to external sources none of which are actually cited in the article. I'm sure there are better things to occupy disk space in wikipedia that this. Besides every good Australian knows it was a Cardassian plot to discredit the Marquis.!!! [[Image:Flag_of_Australia.svg|25px]] Mobile 01 Talk 12:21, 1 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.