Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Todd Manning and Evangeline Williamson


 * 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. Sr13 23:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Todd Manning and Evangeline Williamson

 * – (View AfD) (View log)


 * Strong Delete. Duplicate article created to circumvent the potential deletion of another (Tangeline) of the same intent. —WikiTweak 02:14, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Also strong delete. Content fork of an article which seems headed for deletion anyway.  Ford MF 04:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete per above. Maxamegalon2000 05:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not Soap Opera Guide. At least we're not being called 'racist' in this one. DarkAudit 13:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - closing admin should discuss re-creation/bad faith with the creator. /Blaxthos 16:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with everyone else. Dixonsej 18:19 2 June 2007
 * Delete. Soap opera characters are not innately less notable than Pokemon, Star Trek, or other characters simply because they're popular with a section of society that doesn't often edit Wikipedia, but I don't see any reliable non-trivial independent third-party references to this supposed "supercouple". -- Charlene 10:03, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Article is attempt to circumvent deletion of another article with same content.  --Wingsandsword 13:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

What is all this? I created this because of you so please don't turn it around and be rude, thank you!--Migospia †♥ 03:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC) You guys say one thing and then do something else, not nice! =/--Migospia †♥ 04:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Please get over yourself You do not own either article. The creation of this article was not necessarily in good faith, because it's a copy-and-paste job of the other article also up for deletion. The article could have, and probably should have, been speedy deleted for that reason alone. DarkAudit 04:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Please I do not like being treated the way you treat me so please just learn to deal and play nice, did I ever said I owned the article no? And how was the article not created in good faith? Because it was, how dare you assume what is good faith or not, to me a lot of people like this couple and I after seeing other soap couple pages on here I thought this would be perfect for Todd and Evangeline, I did work hard on the article and you make it seem like I am the only one in the world that wants this article and etc which is not true, I would never make a page just for me or not to be a good reference source or encyclopedic article for other peoples viewing that is not what wikipeida is to me so please don't accuse me of this you don't have to try and start fights and hurt peoples feelings all the time you know you can try, I mean come on at least TRY to be polite, assume good faith, be welcoming,  not to personally attack,   show etiquette,  don't be a dick, but also importantly please show WikiLove! and but I really do not have to explain myself to you because you are VERY rude and mean and I do not want to have to talk to people that talk to me the way you do

And yes of course this was a copy and paste job but with editing for the Tangeline article I did it because WikiTweak stated that in the Tangeline article and so reading with the deletion process, I changed the name-“Tangeline” is a fan base tagging; - So with reading the deletion steps and that being at the time the only reason I thought what I did was good and out of good faith. But please when you go to deletion debates and delete articles or wherever try, at least try not to keep insulting them and belittling them, focus on the deletion article and facts surrounding. but its over its going to be deleted so please stop trying to accuse me and none things --Migospia †♥ 05:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Stop it. I warned you in the other AfD not to make accusations of racism. You did not, and then tried to claim that you weren't. You purposely tried to circumvent Wikipedia policy by posting two copies of the same article. And then you continue to throw a tantrum over what you still seem to consider to be 'your' article. I am not trying to be purposefully mean, but I have to be blunt. You created an article of questionable merit, compounded that by copying it, threw around very serious accusations at other editors, and still seemingly refuse to take responsibility for your own behavior. You need to calm down and realize that having articles go through the wringer is part of being a contributor to Wikipedia. They can't all be gems. This isn't a gem. DarkAudit 00:28, 6 June 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.