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 Speedy deleted by another admin. -- Gogo Dodo 06:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1/0 (literal translation)[edit]

1/0 (literal translation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

I prod'd this article before I noticed that it had already been prod'd and deprod'd. Surely there's some speedy criterion that applies, but I'm not really sure which one. Clearly unencyclopedic in any case. Trovatore 05:29, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Delete. This qualifies for speedy under G1: patent nonsense. CMummert · talk 05:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete - nonsense. So tagged. MER-C 05:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It was already speedied, more than an hour ago, and re-created. --Trovatore 05:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So? Delete it again. MER-C 05:51, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • • Perhaps it would be wise, sir, to let the AFD play out? That way we have precedent for beating it down. --Dennisthe2 06:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete and salt. CMummert · talk 05:52, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete Nonsense. Maxamegalon2000 06:03, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete, salt, etc-DESU 06:06, 29 January 2007 (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.