Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Article name search


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellany page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was Keep. &Euml;vilphoenix Burn! 17:52, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Article name search
This page (and it's talk page) have not been edited since 2004, and seem to have been forgotten. It is orphaned (the discussion page has 4 links, which are all autogenerated lists), and it looks like it was just a test. &#126;MDD4696 23:39, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Although the discussion will probably never be revived, there's no need to delete it. By the way, I've tagged it with . -- Tantalum T  e  lluride  04:31, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep I don't quite see the point in keeping an orphan, but there isn't an amazingly compelling reason to delete an historical artifact either. My guess is that an admin will (improperly) speedy it one future day, and no one will ever notice. Xoloz 04:59, 25 March 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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.