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. --Coredesat 02:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Call for help (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Nominated for deletion in Aug 2005. Last Afd. (Wasn't sure how to do this, if I jacked it up someone please fix, sorry). Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information, this article is a how to and little else. All of the important information is redundant and what isn't can be merged with the appropriate article (as was suggested the first time around). On top of this there are no references (its factual accuracy is disputed), the radio section is almost entirely OR, I would say. All of this and not a comment on the talk page since November 2005. IvoShandor 15:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: On second glance a lot of the article looks like original research. IvoShandor 17:21, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Emergency telephone number, from which most of this is a content fork, with the last couple of sections merged to distress signal - iridescenti (talk to me!) 17:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Maybe but I really can't see anyone typing "call for help" into the Wiki looking for the result to be distress signal, I suppose it's possible.IvoShandor 06:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Isn't really a good summary for the purpose. Two-way radio is somewhat accurate, but it gives the protocol wrong (call out emergency first, then wait for an ACK from the other end, lest you be talking to nobody). Material is better covered in other articles. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 19:58, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I never liked this article. It reads like directions. Could be a possible lawsuit.--ZayZayEM 00:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  Distress signal is another place useful information could end up.--ZayZayEM 00:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I was the original nominator in the first AFD. The article hasn't improved much in the almost 2 years since then. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:55, 23 April 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.