| Revision as of 01:42, 5 May 2007 editFahrenheit451 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,109 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:45, 5 May 2007 edit undoFahrenheit451 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,109 edits →[]Next 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) | ||
| *'''Comment''' Yellowbeard, your statements are not cited. FYI, Ossipoff devised the FBC criteria so it follows there would be some mention. There is no vanity there, I don't know where you get that. OR? Hardly.--] 01:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' Something literally ]. ] <small>( ] • ] • ] )</small> 21:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' Something literally ]. ] <small>( ] • ] • ] )</small> 21:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' - User appears to have established beginning basis for verifiability in external links, instead of using cite formatting in a potential References section. ] 22:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC). | *'''Keep''' - User appears to have established beginning basis for verifiability in external links, instead of using cite formatting in a potential References section. ] 22:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC). | ||
Revision as of 01:45, 5 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)
- Comment Yellowbeard, your statements are not cited. FYI, Ossipoff devised the FBC criteria so it follows there would be some mention. There is no vanity there, I don't know where you get that. OR? Hardly.--Fahrenheit451 01:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Something literally made up in school one day. ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 21:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - User appears to have established beginning basis for verifiability in external links, instead of using cite formatting in a potential References section. Smee 22:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC).
- weak keep The first of those at least using the term in the title. DGG 23:24, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep This criteria is notable and appears cited frequently on the rangevoting.org website and is NOT original research.--Fahrenheit451 01:42, 5 May 2007 (UTC)