Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lost island timeline
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 17:12, 18 February 2023 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 17:12, 18 February 2023 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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 Delete --JForget 01:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Lost island timeline (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This is a contested PROD. As far as I can tell it's entirely original research. There are no reliable sources. WP:PLOT problems. the_undertow talk 17:42, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete Entirely original reasearch with no possiblity of verifacation. No assertion of notability of topic. Dgf32 (talk) 18:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Wow. So much OR it's stunning. I can't see a possibility of salvaging it without rewrite and extensive sourcing. Pigman☿ 18:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete. Per WP:OR,WP:PLOT, and way too much speculation. Tabor (talk) 19:10, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nice idea, potentially useful, arguably notable given the popularity of the show and its impact, but hopelessly original research, speculation and unencyclopedic. Is there a "Lost" wiki it could move to? Nick Connolly (talk) 19:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Something like this maybe. [1][2]. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 23:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- so we can add redundant to the list and not as a good as the one on another wiki as well :) Nick Connolly (talk) 01:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Completely original research and quite a lot of it might be completely made up. I see absolutely no way this article could be sourced properly or otherwise salvaged. ~ mazca talk 20:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- delete OR, complete lack of sources. i see no option beyond a complete rewrite with verifiable sources.Grandmartin11 (talk) 22:37, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete WP:OR. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 23:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete So many OR problems that NOT#PLOT isn't even worth mentioning. – sgeureka t•c 12:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 16:30, 17 April 2008 (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.