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. - Mailer Diablo 04:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Werepyre (2nd Nomination)[edit]

Werepyre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)(2nd nomination) - (View log)

Article is not only non-notable fancruft. It is completely unsourced nonnotable fancruft which provides absolutely no context about where it comes from either. It is also a recreation of a previously deleted article, however nothing new or informative has been added to warrant such a recreation. — Falerin^{<talk>,<contrib>} 04:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Original research, cruft, vanity (I'll bet). --Wooty Woot? contribs 05:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I really, really hope this isn't a vanity article. On the other hand, the Internet can be a wild place at times :) Anyway, unsourced fancruft (from some game; I don't know which one) with no consistency among the Google hits. --N Shar 05:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Werepyre? Is that someone who turns into a funeral fire at the full moon? Seriously, there's no evidence this is anything beyond some sort of World of Darkness fansomething. Zetawoof^(ζ) 09:29, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Wikipedia is not for things made up on this forum one day. Serpent's Choice 11:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and thanks to Serpent's Choice for actually finding the forum this comes from. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unreferenced probably original material. Violates WP:NOT#OR Dugwiki 18:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The article is in reference to AdventureQuest just as Serpent's Choice indicated. It is definitely not vanity though as I am staff on the game and I myself nominated it for deletion as pointless when someone posted it on those very same forums.— Falerin^{<talk>,<contrib>} 18:29, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Falerin. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:32, 23 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.