Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karl Kae Knecht: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
d
Kmweber (talk | contribs)
Karl Kae Knecht: no valid reason to delete, as anyone who doesn't hate Wikipedia understands
Line 5: Line 5:
Non-notable, unsourced article, not seeing any claim to lasting notability on google and being "instrumental" without a source, is a weasel word. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 19:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Non-notable, unsourced article, not seeing any claim to lasting notability on google and being "instrumental" without a source, is a weasel word. '''[[User:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFFF00;background-color: #0000FF;'>MBisanz</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:MBisanz|<span style='color: #FFA500;'>talk</span>]]</sup> 19:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' - not notable, and no sources, reliable or otherwise. [[User:WBOSITG|<font color=#000000>'''weburiedoursecretsinthegarden'''</font>]] 19:46, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' - not notable, and no sources, reliable or otherwise. [[User:WBOSITG|<font color=#000000>'''weburiedoursecretsinthegarden'''</font>]] 19:46, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' &mdash; Subject of the article clearly exists; nothing else matters. Sources are only necessary for direct quotes and for statements someone is challenging, so the lack thereof is not a valid reason to delete. If you have a problem with lack of sources, perhaps you should do some productive work yourself rather than lazily deleting the hard work of others because you can't be bothered to do anything positive for the encyclopedia. [[User:Kmweber|Kurt Weber]] ('''<span style="background-color: white; color: blue">Go</span> <span style="background-color: blue; color: white">Colts!</span>''') 19:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:56, 19 September 2008

Karl Kae Knecht (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable, unsourced article, not seeing any claim to lasting notability on google and being "instrumental" without a source, is a weasel word. MBisanz talk 19:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - not notable, and no sources, reliable or otherwise. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 19:46, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep — Subject of the article clearly exists; nothing else matters. Sources are only necessary for direct quotes and for statements someone is challenging, so the lack thereof is not a valid reason to delete. If you have a problem with lack of sources, perhaps you should do some productive work yourself rather than lazily deleting the hard work of others because you can't be bothered to do anything positive for the encyclopedia. Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 19:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]