Difference between revisions of "NSWiki:Deletion"

Revision as of 10:38, 31 October 2006

These pages are candidates for deletion by consensus. Please discuss each article on the appropriate article talk page - only edit this page to add or remove deletion candidates.

See NSwiki:Deletion policy for other types of deletion, including speedy deletion criteria.

To request that an article be deleted, please put an {{inclusion}} tag at the top of the article, post your reason for deletion on the article's talk page, and put the following under the current date (if the current date is not listed, post it below other dates):

=== [[PageToBeDeleted]] ([[Talk:PageToBeDeleted|add to this discussion]]) ===
{{Talk:PageToBeDeleted}}

where PageToBeDeleted is the name of the page you wish to delete. If the article is not posted to this page, the sysops may not see it and the article will not get deleted!

21 February 2006

Age of imperialism (Defuniak) (add to this discussion)

Procedural nomination - put up for deletion by User:Macabees. Personally, I'd say delete as nonsense. Gruen2alk 01:31, 21 February 2006 (GMT)

The author did not give the date of when this particular era. --Constantina 14:34, 2 March 2006 (GMT)

I'd say contact the author and ask what he intends to do with this. Ceo \ rant \ rave 02:11, 16 March 2006 (GMT)

The author was anonymous, and under that IP made only this single contribution. Nothing links here (nor to the redirect page), and there is no Defuniak article. The nation Defuniak doesn't exist (or no longer exists). This article looks a lot like nonsense. Seems like a valid candidate for deletion. Aridd 02:10, 7 November 2006 (GMT)

Arab-Egypt Embassy (add to this discussion)

I'd like to raise the issue of these sort of pages. Puppets, the sole point of which is to act as a puppet in this function, surely do not merit whole pages to themselves.

What do we think about making a new policy on this? Perhaps such pages should only be made if the nation in question has attained such noteworthy gameplay/RP status?

Oh, and delete whatever. ~Gruen2 09:21, 30 April 2006 (GMT)

Either delete, or merge into Arab League. And yes, agreed. Aridd 02:05, 7 November 2006 (GMT)

19 July 2006

Governments (add to this discussion)

I don't think we need this and UN Category. Also, it's slightly misleading to call it "Governments". The UN category is defined by (d'uh) the UN, and doesn't actually say what kind of government it is (in the sense of whether it's a multi-party republic, a constitutional monarchy, a parliamentary one-party theocratic republic or whatever). Aridd 10:09, 19 July 2006 (GMT)

One thing this article includes is a few links to more detailed articles on specific UN Categories. In general, I agree with you, but I'd like to suggestion we add links in the UN Category article to those more specific articles. Mikitivity 15:50, 19 July 2006 (GMT)

Done. I've added links (in UN Category) to government types, and to the only article on a UN Category (New York Times Democracy). Aridd 16:13, 19 July 2006 (GMT)

Now that's done, is there any reason to keep this article? Aridd 23:10, 1 October 2006 (GMT)

No. ~Gruen2alk 14:35, 31 October 2006 (GMT)

If there are no further comments and no objections, I'll delete shortly. Aridd 12:07, 7 November 2006 (GMT)