Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Billion pool


 * 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 Delete unanimously. Xoloz 15:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Billion pool
Do we need this pool this early?? Delete until we reach a late enough time. Georgia guy 18:37, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * DRV Notice, This debate has been restarted due to irregularities that has been raised in deletion review. I have no opinon on this matter. - Mailer Diablo 17:40, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless the Trillion Pool is deleted, in which case, keep. As I said in the Trillion Pool discussion, we could use one new pool since the Eleventy-Billion Pool is pretty full, and the Trillion Pool is more developed than this one. Timrem 19:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It was cute for a day or two but the joke's over. Time to delete.  Rossami (talk) 05:23, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Let's not start a trend of filling up our administrative namespace with WPcruft.  --Hugh Charles Parker (talk - contribs) 15:30, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is about the zillionth time this has been listed here. 24.127.224.173 17:53, 27 May 2006 (UTC) sock. —Ruud 20:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. —Ruud 20:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. If it weren't for the ambiguity of the word Billion (see Long and short scales) I would have voted to re-create this pool when Wikipedia reaches 100 million articles, but because of its ambiguity, I strongly support the title "Wikipedia:Thousand-million pool" when we reach a late enough time for such a pool. Georgia guy 00:26, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Why not "Wikipedia:1,000,000,000 pool" then? That's a much better title than "Wikipedia:Thousand-million pool" pool, as "thousand-million" is uncommon. 205.188.117.12 16:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, thinking to have a billion articles even before we reach 10 million. --Ter e nce Ong 15:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, so ridiculously far in the future that it's pointless. -Big Smooth 05:29, 30 May 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.