Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Widmore
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 19:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non notable, unverified information and speculation Jtrost (T | C | #) 13:11, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Lostcruft. Fan1967 13:27, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete non-notable cruft. If the company becomes notable later and is indeed affilitated with Hanso, then it can have a small section on the Hanso page. --Maelwys 14:16, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete at this point — nothing to say about this subject. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge with one of the other Lost pages (such as Dharma). Every excuse the nom gave for this articles deletion is highly incorrect. According to a verifiable source (lost podcast) Carlton said himself that this is notable. He also said that widmore would appear in Fire+Water. Also, the name DOES appear on the pregnancy test, it was in plain sight (no freeze frame or speculation required, unless you consider looking with our eyes 'original research'). I support its merge simply because there isn't that much on the subject, it has two or three lines of fact, and it doesnt look like its going to play a major role anytime soon. ArgentiumOutlaw 11:03, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete whatever Carlton said, according to me this article is just one paragraph long! The respective references could be written in the episode recaps, but that is not the same as merging. Arru 20:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, unfortunately you just basically said 'ignore citable references, what i'm saying is....etc'. Although I do agree about it being a good idea to write the references in the episode recaps, but I thought that was a merge? moving the data elsewhere. If i'm wrong, then what's the difference between a Merge and Merging the data? and how would I vote for the latter? ArgentiumOutlaw 03:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Inconsequential, speculative. -- PKtm 16:17, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as per nom.—LeflymanTalk 17:12, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Not relevant (as of now), not encyclopedic. Do not merge with Hanso or Dharma, as any link between the two is speculative. Danflave 16:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete non-notable fancruft. Rillian 21:42, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Moe ε 17:55, 12 April 2006 (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.