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. Wizardman 05:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1998 FIFA World Cup (match reports)[edit]

1998 FIFA World Cup (match reports) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Adds nothing to the 1998 FIFA World Cup article. In fact, most of the text in this article is exactly the same as in the Summary section of said main article. – PeeJay 15:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. – PeeJay 15:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. John Hayes^talk 15:13, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. GiantSnowman (talk) 15:15, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. пﮟოьεԻ 57 15:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Redundant content fork. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 15:51, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Made reduntant by the original article Doc Strange^{Telepathic Messages}_{Strange Frequencies} 16:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom.  ARTYOM  16:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Redundant from the original article, does not need to exist a second time. Redphoenix526 (talk) 18:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Dgf32 (talk) 20:00, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Seems like WP:SNOW probably comes into effect here. – PeeJay 20:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - wow, how did this article slip under the radar for four years. Delete per nom. Peanut4 (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Everything in article already covered in 1998 FIFA World Cup. TheProf | 2007 22:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, essay. Punkmorten (talk) 19:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Following comment was mistakenly left on the talk page of this AfD: ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:18, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • What does 'per nom' mean? Tool2Die4 (talk) 21:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's short for "as per nominator". It's basically a substitute for writing out the nominator's reasoning over again. – PeeJay 21:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. BanRay 21:58, 1 March 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.