| Revision as of 22:04, 20 August 2005 editCurps (talk | contribs)52,628 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:54, 21 August 2005 edit undoCarnildo (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users21,472 edits →[]: De-listing: inappropriate VfDNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 0 auto; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below] Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page. | |||
| <!-- | |||
| Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the VfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> | |||
| The result of the debate was '''speedy keep'''. Barring exceptional circumstances, we don't delete certified RfCs, and exceptional circumstances don't get run through VfD. --] 05:54, 21 August 2005 (UTC) | |||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| This page is nothing more than a libelous personal attack on another Wikipedian by an anon user. The page attacks Keetoowah's racial identity and the anon user is making his comments based upon no evidence or personal experience with Keetoowah. The page fulfills no purpose other than to attack Keetoowah personally. It is | This page is nothing more than a libelous personal attack on another Wikipedian by an anon user. The page attacks Keetoowah's racial identity and the anon user is making his comments based upon no evidence or personal experience with Keetoowah. The page fulfills no purpose other than to attack Keetoowah personally. It is | ||
| Line 5: | Line 11: | ||
| *'''Speedy Keep''' -- we don't VfD RFCs. If they don't get certified, they go away; if they get certified, they go through the process. ] ] 15:25, 20 August 2005 (UTC) | *'''Speedy Keep''' -- we don't VfD RFCs. If they don't get certified, they go away; if they get certified, they go through the process. ] ] 15:25, 20 August 2005 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' and '''Reopen''' -- This is demostrating the exact type of behavior that led to the Rfc in the first place. -- '''This vote by ]''' Please sign your votes. | *'''Keep''' and '''Reopen''' -- This is demostrating the exact type of behavior that led to the Rfc in the first place. -- '''This vote by ]''' Please sign your votes. | ||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <font color=red>'''Please do not modify it.'''</font> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an ]). No further edits should be made to this page]</div> | |||
Revision as of 05:54, 21 August 2005
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was speedy keep. Barring exceptional circumstances, we don't delete certified RfCs, and exceptional circumstances don't get run through VfD. --Carnildo 05:54, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Keetoowah
This page is nothing more than a libelous personal attack on another Wikipedian by an anon user. The page attacks Keetoowah's racial identity and the anon user is making his comments based upon no evidence or personal experience with Keetoowah. The page fulfills no purpose other than to attack Keetoowah personally. It is libelous. Keetoowah 15:04, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Fixed link title. Keep--we don't delete RFCs. Please be aware of Misplaced Pages:No legal threats. Meelar (talk) 15:17, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep -- we don't VfD RFCs. If they don't get certified, they go away; if they get certified, they go through the process. Antandrus (talk) 15:25, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and Reopen -- This is demostrating the exact type of behavior that led to the Rfc in the first place. -- This vote by User:Gorgonzilla Please sign your votes.
- 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.