Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transvolution

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was snowy delete. Sango 123 (e) 18:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transvolution

Original research, asserts copyright. Prod'ed, tag removed by anonymous contributor. Accurizer 00:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, there's nothing to suggest it isn't complete bollocks either. — May. 24, '06 [00:45] <freak|talk>
Delete per nom.--blue520 00:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neologism, OR and a copyright tag, what's not to delete? Fan1967 01:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Social concept created for Humberto J. Arcadia in 1989 presented as a Thesis" ... I think that pretty much seals the deal that this is orgiinal research. Delete. Aplomado ^talk 01:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - it has a copyright tag. Get rid of it. - Richardcavell 01:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above Hobbeslover 01:35, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all the above. Gw e rnol 02:05, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete awful! - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 02:13, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. And maybe vanity as well. Kevin 02:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete copyright tag...no good. Ch u ck^(척뉴넘) 08:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, copyright problems here, shouldn't this be speedied under A8? --Terence Ong 10:01, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I don't think it is copied from a commercial web site, so it would not qualify under A8. Accurizer 10:27, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete if someone claims copyright, even if we can't find that copyrighted material on the internet. Mak (talk) 18:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. What a waste of everyone's time.Moreschi 19:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Complete rubbish Aspern 21:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom. ILove Plankton ⁽ ^L⁾ 22:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom. — ßott e siηi ^(talk) 23:46, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Copyright issues, in bad faith, and the stub doesn't have enough information to be expanded even if it was okay. Delete it ASAP - Tomodachigai

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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.