Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fravia: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 07:57, 16 March 2022

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2009 May 5.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 redirect to reverse engineering. MBisanz ^talk 05:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fravia

Poorly written POV article that does not meet WP:BIO. There are no independent sources, either. Anything that can actually be salvaged from this can be merged into reverse engineering. I propose Fravia be a redirect. Enigma^msg 04:59, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete My findings were consistent with the nomination. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:25, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Close nomination/Be bold! You don't need AFD to make something into a redirect. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:16, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect: Agree with MGM. Subject is not notable enough to have a separate article. Nominator's suggestion seems to me to be the best thing to do, rather than deletion. Chamal ^talk 13:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the page is very useful by itself and should not be merged with anything else. Poorly or not poorly is debatable, you write better if you can! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.10.143 (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 :{{la|Fravia}} (<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Fravia|wpReason={{urlencode: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fravia]]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fravia|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2009 February 27#{{anchorencode:Fravia}}|View log]])</noinclude>
-Poorly written POV article that does not meet [[WP:BIO]]. There are no independent sources, either. Anything that can actually be salvaged from this can be merged into [[reverse engineering]]. I propose Fravia be a redirect.  [[User:Enigmaman|'''<font color="blue">Enigma</font>''']]<sup>[[User talk:Enigmaman|''<font color="#FFA500">msg</font>'']]</sup> 04:59, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
+Poorly written POV article that does not meet [[WP:BIO]]. There are no independent sources, either. Anything that can actually be salvaged from this can be merged into [[reverse engineering]]. I propose Fravia be a redirect.  [[User:Enigmaman|'''<span style="color:blue;">Enigma</span>''']][[User talk:Enigmaman|''<sup style="color:#FFA500;">msg</sup>'']] 04:59, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 *'''Delete''' My findings were consistent with the nomination. [[User:ChildofMidnight|ChildofMidnight]] ([[User talk:ChildofMidnight|talk]]) 06:25, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 *'''Close nomination/Be bold!''' You don't need AFD to make something into a redirect. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 10:16, 27 February 2009 (UTC)