Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Favorite betrayal criterion (3rd nomination): Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactivelyNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:44, 3 May 2007 editYellowbeard (talk | contribs)220 edits Creating deletion discussion page for Favorite betrayal criterion  Revision as of 21:53, 3 May 2007 edit undoObiterDicta (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,874 edits []: +dNext edit →
Line 3: Line 3:
:{{la|Favorite betrayal criterion}} – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude> :{{la|Favorite betrayal criterion}} – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude>
'''Delete'''. Original research. Vanity. See ]. All links refer directly or indirectly to Mike Ossipoff. This criterion isn't discussed in serious, academic circles. This criterion is not notable. Not a single paper about this criterion has ever been accepted for publication. Furthermore, this article is a repost of a previously-deleted article. ] 20:44, 3 May 2007 (UTC) '''Delete'''. Original research. Vanity. See ]. All links refer directly or indirectly to Mike Ossipoff. This criterion isn't discussed in serious, academic circles. This criterion is not notable. Not a single paper about this criterion has ever been accepted for publication. Furthermore, this article is a repost of a previously-deleted article. ] 20:44, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Something literally ]. ] <small>( ] • ] • ] )</small> 21:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:53, 3 May 2007

Favorite betrayal criterion

Favorite betrayal criterion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Delete. Original research. Vanity. See here. All links refer directly or indirectly to Mike Ossipoff. This criterion isn't discussed in serious, academic circles. This criterion is not notable. Not a single paper about this criterion has ever been accepted for publication. Furthermore, this article is a repost of a previously-deleted article. Yellowbeard 20:44, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Categories: