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. MBisanz ^talk 09:04, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tarvuism[edit]

Gimmick made up earlier this year and no indication of notability. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:34, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Elements of commercial spam (using wikipedia to create notability). As with such things, it could become more notable, just isn't right now. Arrrr, matey ... --Quartermaster (talk) 16:14, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NFT. Cosmic Latte (talk) 16:28, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NFT. The topic doesn't justify a Wikipedia article. AdjustShift (talk) 17:56, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete (G11) — contains spam, spam, spam, spam, spam, baked beans, spam, spam, spam and spam. MuZemike (talk) 20:01, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete religioncruft. JuJube (talk) 01:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete please. No more imaginary religions. AdjustShift, this isn't even a topic! Drmies (talk) 03:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No indication of notability. Edward321 (talk) 12:09, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Do Not Delete Useful unbiased factual reporting on a spoof religion.
- But not notable.—Largo Plazo (talk) 15:40, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable. --Bonadea (talk) 16:08, 16 October 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.