Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OS-tan
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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 Keep, bad-faith nomination.
]OS-tan
DELETE
]- Comment, probable single purpose account. As for the nomination, the topic itself has 7 intrawikis, including the japanese one. I get 135,000 hits at Google for "os-tan", although the only notable mention is at Kotaku, here. However, the fact that a japanese intrawiki exists (and with so many different contributors) leads me to believe it is notable enough (otherwise it may have been deleted time ago from there, as any non-notable english topic would be deleted from the English Wikipedia). -- ReyBrujo 19:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep I find it awfully suspicious that the nominator's first (and only) edits are to nominate this article for deletion. There's nothing spammy about the article, but the OR and cruft concerns could be taken care of. Nevertheless, smells like a bad-faith nom to me. NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 21:34, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Seconding what NeoChaosX said. --Theredstarswl 00:49, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep Not the best written article, but interesting and informative. --Ideogram 01:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep It looks a lot different than the last time I saw it, and there is OR and CRUFT, but neither are grounds for deletion, and I dispute the SPAM. Kelvinc 01:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep This article may have its flaws, but it is interesting and informative! Plus it has several pages that depend on it. I do not know what the guy trying to get it deleted is thinking.--NewYinzer 01:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. -- Apl66 23:26, 1 October 2006 (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.