Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richie Garnet
Appearance
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 delete as vandalism. ... discospinster talk 12:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Richie Garnet
- Richie Garnet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
WP:HOAX No sources, a Google search turns up nothing. Eric444 (talk) 04:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:
- Roughly Cut (I) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Costume (Richie Garnet) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Roughly Cut (II) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- A Garnet Christmas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Pefectly Clear: A Collection of Country Gospel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Jessie (Richie Garnet) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Untouched (Richie Garnet) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- The Shaolin Monkeys (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Comment. This looks quite a bit similar to talk) 04:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll admit it; I am damn impressed with the chutzpah of these articles. The template, complete with two links to actual songs by an actual artist really helps bring the whole thing together. Entirely made up, there's nothing on google or anywhere else, so Speedy Delete and a suggestion that if the author could put this sort of effort into making real articles he'd be a hell of an editor.--]
- Speedy delete]
- Someone has rather unhelpfully removed the BLP violations, so now the article does not reflect how the SPA had left it. I still think it should be deleted, as the article now says even less how notable this chappy is. Ohconfucius (talk) 12:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:10, 30 June 2009 (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.