Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Carlow Crab
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 delete
"Carlow Crab" gets zero Google hits, as do most of the other characters mentioned in the article (although googling "ashley asshole" does produce a bunch of rather, uh, interesting webpages). Perhaps it is a work of original fiction by the anon IP author. -- Curps 03:16, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete ... boy did that make me laugh, though. Adidas 14:26, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Nonsensical, and the original fiction assertation seems likely to be correct. The Literate Engineer 03:49, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete can this be speedied? Hamster Sandwich 03:51, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Do I really have to explain this? Pacific Coast Highway 04:53, August 9, 2005 (UTC)
- No you don't. Neither does anyone else. del—Encephalon | ζ | Σ 09:08:37, 2005-08-09 (UTC)
- Delete Agree. <drini ☎> 14:35, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I tagged this for speedy and am surprised it's still here. I guess it's not as nonsensical as it looked at 3.30 this morning. Still useless though. Flowerparty talk 16:35, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Delete this article NOW!
JUST DELETE IT. NOW! DELETE IT! IT HAS BEEN ON FOR TOO LONG. DELETE!
- Delete when the only page that comes up on search is the wiki delete log...that's bad. --Etacar11 00:14, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Set fire to either page, or my eyes - Hahnchen 01:39, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete nn, fiction, original work, nonsensical. It also hurt my poor little brain. --Apyule 05:45, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, and then stab in the face with a sharp fork. ral315 14:23, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, will this take 2 weeks to delete, by the way.
- comment - I can't help but notice that people who appoint themselves hall monitors and removed articles like this from the speedy delete pile rarely come here to then vote on the matter. Sometimes I wonder if there isn't a subtle sort of vandalism going on here that ensures ridiculous pages like this stay up for weeks past their expiration date.
- Delete. Or possibly transwiki to Uncyclopedia. In fact, I'll put a copy there now, it's not like I need anyone's consensus to add something to Uncyclopedia. Aquillion 07:59, 12 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.