Misplaced Pages

Talk:Dump digging: Difference between revisions

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.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 06:17, 23 April 2013 editRileyBot (talk | contribs)Bots20,030 editsm Bot: Substituting Template:Unsigned) (Task 14 - disable← Previous edit Revision as of 18:36, 15 November 2013 edit undoPatHadley (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,056 edits Added to WikiProject ArchaeologyNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WikiProject Archaeology|class=start|importance=low}}
{{oldafdfull | date = 23 January 2009 | result = '''keep''' | page = Dump digging }} {{oldafdfull | date = 23 January 2009 | result = '''keep''' | page = Dump digging }}
This seems like a perfectly valid article. I don't see why it should be deleted. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> This seems like a perfectly valid article. I don't see why it should be deleted. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

Revision as of 18:36, 15 November 2013

WikiProject iconArchaeology Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Articles for deletionThis article was nominated for deletion on 23 January 2009. The result of the discussion was keep.

This seems like a perfectly valid article. I don't see why it should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phronko (talk • contribs)

Categories: