Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Infinite LP


 * 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. —Doug Bell talk 17:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

The Infinite LP


Contested prod, sorta. It was recreated 2 hours after it was deleted through a prod. It was tagged a few hours later with a speedy tag but not a proper speedy criteria. This is a procedural nomination to reach consensus on the article. Metros232 00:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete There are no sources posted, not even rumours of there being an album with this name. --Zimbabweed 00:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. With no sources, this is all just speculation. Green451 01:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Cbrown1023 01:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. User inserted link to this into Eminem and other articles, where it was removed quickly and without comment. Tubezone 01:39, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. ' FL a  RN ' (talk) 01:46, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. MER-C 03:16, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Sr13 03:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete crystal ball  SkierRMH, 08:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. - Mailer Diablo 12:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Hello32020 13:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Mailer Diablo. --SonicChao talk 15:37, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete entirely speculative, unsourced. There being no deadline and no need to scopp the music press, we can do without this for now thanks. Guy (Help!) 17:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. &mdash;The Gr e at Llamamoo? 20:01, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Huh? I gave a procedural nomination, no explanation for why it should be deleted.  I don't think my reason should be "per nom"ed. Metros232 22:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --  dhp 1080  (u&middot;t&middot;c)  22:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Huh? I gave a procedural nomination, no explanation for why it should be deleted.  I don't think my reason should be "per nom"ed. Metros232 22:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - per Mailer Diablo. FireSpik e Editor Review! 23:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and lacks any form of verifiable source. Gwernol 21:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete speculation. Rever e ndG 23:36, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Beyond the fact that it is unsourced and not verifiable, it's just not close enought to have an article. 2Pac 14:03, 26 November 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.