Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Conspiracy: The London bombing Conspiracy Guild

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Already deleted --malathion talk 02:01, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Conspiracy: The London bombing Conspiracy Guild
I am moving this here from CfD, since it is not a category. Debate so far follows. -Splash 17:45, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

I propose deletion of this page. There have been no conspiracy theories concerning the London bombings and Wiki should not be creating them (although Wiki has certainly promoted other conspiracy theories). Also, doing this one week after the murders is highly disrespectful. --Noitall 04:39, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Strong keep
 * First, there is a great conspiracy theory about it, cheek prisonplanet.com or
 * Second, IF there is a conspiracy, is it not more disrespectful to the persones murdered to ignore it?
 * Third, Its a wiki project aimed at improving the quality of the subject, not a article in it self. Its newly started, but it will grow, as people start to make research on the subject.

I'm truly sorry if it offended anybody, i truly did not intend that.--Striver 04:51, 31 July 2005 (UTC)


 * I certainly accept that the matter was not intended to be disrespectful, but I think it gives the overall impression to strangers of at least being insensitive. --Noitall 04:53, July 31, 2005 (UTC)


 * Dear brother in humanity. What should the project be named, what is your sugestion? --Striver 05:01, 31 July 2005 (UTC)


 * I admit bias against conspiracies theories in general, but why do you need a separate page for each one, why not just the Wikipedia:WikiProject Conspiracy: The World Conspiracy Guild? --Noitall 05:10, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Simply put, i gave the london bombing its own project after having been extreamly frustrated att the pure sencorship on the subject. Basic mainstream facts was deleted from the page, on the basis of it being "irrelevant", even though it hade been covered by several non-wiki articles and the removal of the mainstream facts was fiercly opposed by several editors, but the majority deleted it as "irrelevant". I strongly feelt that it needed a project where people dedicated to the conspiracy could find strenght and arguments in number, to evade being dissmised as "irrelevant". The The World Conspiracy Guild tries to paint with a broader brush trying to show the historical conspiracies to give credebility to the ongoing conspiracys. The project would be flooded if every conspiracy would have been dealt with there. --Striver 05:34, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Move to Vfd Isn't this a Vfd related task? It is not a category, per say.   &infin; Who ? &iquest; ?  10:10, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Coment I dont get it. What is the project doing in a Vfd of articles? This is by no means a article, this is a project aimed to gather material and people intrested in the subject, in order to make a article, OR add material to any existing article related to the topic. Could you explain to me why there is a Vfd for a project? --Striver 17:55, 31 July 2005 (UTC)


 * It's a page on the Wikipedia: namespace so it can be proposed for deletion. David | Talk 18:20, 31 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Bro, do you know the diffrense between a article and a project? is this (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam:SIIEG) also a article? Why dont you go and Vfd it?

--Striver 18:38, 31 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Well dear, I haven't actually voted on this one. The link you give is to a talk page, and talk pages normally go with their associated Project page. The project page for Islam:SIIEG is subject to VfD if someone wants to put it up. David | Talk 19:04, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Everything that is not a template, a category, a redirect or an image for deletion comes to VfD (whether they are project pages or article pages). -Splash 01:06, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per the others related. -Splash 01:04, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete irrelevant.  Grue   19:26, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Conspiracruft.   ral  315  21:31, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, without question or hesitation. K1Bond007 07:24, August 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - highly dubious, and not suitable for Wikipedia. Dan100 (Talk) 21:39, August 4, 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.