Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Raven the Musical


 * 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 04:12, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

The Raven the Musical

 * - (View AfD) (View log)
 * (adding, basically duplicate) Mango juice talk 12:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Non-notable musical posted by its creator (WP:COI), using Wikipedia as a free web space provider. I originally speedied it under WP:CSD ("Uploader does not assert permission") because the creator added "Copying punishable by law" at the top, and figured WP:SNOW would apply. It has since been edited to put a factual introductory paragraph, but still remains completely untenable as an article, and fails WP:N, WP:V and WP:NFT. ~Matticus TC 00:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete And delete Matthew Weinstein's vanity insertion at The Raven too. --Wetman 02:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. No assertion of notability. No attempt to comply with WP:NOT. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a free place to publish. --Shirahadasha 02:31, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete there's no assertion of notability. JCO312 03:13, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hard to run a google check due to "That's so Raven", but appears to be Hoax. Speedy Delete. - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 03:57, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, no assertion of notability. The website appears to be here and here's google's text cache of the site. I removed the mention of it from The Raven while incidentally reading that article. Graham 87 05:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This article is so clearly a delete that I'd like to vote for a delete, then resurrect it and delete it again just for good measure. 193.129.65.37 08:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete This obviously meets the criteria. Somitho 10:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete and consider salting the earth. If it's been recreated once it may be recreated again. Cheers, Lankybugger 13:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete per nom, and as obvious violation of WP:COI. Does the author realize that by posting here, he has released all copyright permissions to this piece, and should it ever become notable it will be out there for everyone to copy.  I believe that is the definition of shooting oneself in the foot.  Pastordavid 17:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, clear vanity article. Mango juice talk 12:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Two days and not a single dissenting comment against the deletion, not even from an IP user or newly created account. Ladies and Gentlemen, I think we can WP:SNOW this. Cheers, Lankybugger 14:27, 26 January 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.