Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World War V

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. – ABCD 21:19, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

World War V

 * Delete article is pure speculation Foodmarket 20:49, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete because Wikipedia is not a crystal ball--Halidecyphon 20:46, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - Come on, Ragnarok, Mother Nature, or Bill Gates are possiblities to start World War V? This has to be a joke article. --Anonymous Cow 20:51, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete It doesn't even deserve a rewrite. I can't verify that it exists - if there is widespread speculation about a world war that brings about the end of the world, it isn't given the specific number V as far as I can tell. What about WWVI, WWVII, WWXLVII? If anyone can argue that it is a popular and notable term, I maychange my vote, but for now, delete. DDerby 20:54, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy, nonsense, recreation of deleted content. &mdash;Korath (Talk) 20:57, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Extremely delete. Effectively a list of random names. Eric119 21:17, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for every possible reason. Note though that we do have an article on World War IV, but that seems to be based on actual recorded usage (however tenuous). sjorford &rarr;&bull;&larr; 21:34, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Also note Votes for deletion/World War IV. Uncle G 22:52, 2005 Apr 13 (UTC)
 * Delete for all the reasons given above. Pure speculation. Mgm|(talk) 21:35, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * delete WW-IV is barely legit for an article, as speculation, WW-V is sheer nonsense. BigFatDave 22:34, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, Why not? Stupidly non-enciclopedic.José San Martin 22:56, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete if World War IV is war on terrorism then my candidate for WW-V is the horrible war in central africa (Second Congo War) but not this nonsense v8rik
 * Delete. Although I did enjoy the section on 'possible starters of the war.' --bainer 23:48, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for all the reasons given above. Zzyzx11 | Talk 23:49, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Someone's spending entirely too much time on extremist websites. - Lucky 6.9 04:26, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nateji77 04:55, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, original research, speculation. Megan1967 07:17, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Am I right that Albert Einstein tried to predict what weapons they would use in WW4? Something along the lines of "I don't know what they'll use in WW3, but in WW4 they'll use sticks and stones." But if even Einstein would not predict WW5, neither should we. Sjakkalle 07:29, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Glad we can all agree on some things! --Halidecyphon 09:04, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Too vague, speculation. Let's get the next two world wars done with first before we start thinking about No. 5, please. 23skidoo 13:37, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 3 and 4 might come all too soon; let's not be eager. Barno 19:25, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. --Tydaj 23:12, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, Non-encyclopedic. Stupid too. K1Bond007 23:40, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)


 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.