Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aztec Pyramids: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 12:56, 19 October 2018

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 - kept - SimonP 01:29, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

Aztec Pyramids

No links to this article, content looks as if it were slapped together in a couple of seconds. The external links might worth merging into another article. -- llywrch 22:39, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and expand. Rick K 22:51, May 16, 2005 (UTC)
Keep. But move to Mesoamerican pyramids, since even the ExtLks aren't exclusively Aztec. –Hajor 23:01, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. Stancel 23:11, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but should be renamed to Mesoamerican pyramids with Aztec pyramids being a redirect as the article discusses the pyramids built by other civilisations. Capitalistroadster 23:57, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the VfD was added while I was trying to improve the article shortly after it was posted. Since then, the article has been completly redone and is now a very good article. Vegaswikian 01:53, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Now a good, serviceable article which in the right hands could be on its way to greatness, given the inherently-fascinating (to many) nature of the topic.Rlquall 02:58, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. Definitely worthy of an article. Grutness...wha? 03:30, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Good topic nominated within 14 minutes of creation, had two good faith links in it. That's sure to be discouraging to new users. (And yes, I did look at the awful text that was there when nominated.) VfD should be a last option, not a first reaction. --Unfocused 05:12, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Excellent cleanup job. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:54, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keeep Wikipedia Rocks!!! -- BD2412 ^talk 19:59, 2005 May 18 (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.

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 *'''Keep''' the VfD was added while I was trying to improve the article shortly after it was posted.  Since then, the article has been completly redone and is now a very good article. [[User:Vegaswikian|Vegaswikian]] 01:53, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''' Now a good, serviceable article which in the right hands could be on its way to greatness, given the inherently-fascinating (to many) nature of the topic.[[User:Rlquall|Rlquall]] 02:58, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
-*'''Keep''' and expand. Definitely worthy of an article. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...<font color=green><small>''[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?</small>''</font>]] 03:30, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
+*'''Keep''' and expand. Definitely worthy of an article. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]]...<font color=green><small>''[[User_talk:Grutness|wha?]]''</small></font> 03:30, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''' Good topic nominated within 14 minutes of creation, had two good faith links in it.  That's sure to be discouraging to new users.  (And yes, I did look at the awful text that was there when nominated.)  VfD should be a last option, not a first reaction.  --[[User:Unfocused|Unfocused]] 05:12, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''' Excellent cleanup job. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]]|[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 12:54, 17 May 2005 (UTC)