Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Politics of Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 was delete. - Mailer Diablo 09:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Politics of Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Non-notable, and all of these "political issues" are already discussed in greater detail in List of Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law episodes. Pufnstuf 00:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, per redundancy of List of Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law episodes. --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 00:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Redundant, and a borderline violation of WP:SYN. —dgiestc 05:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Thewinchester (talk) 07:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Keep, because cool idea for an article. --Wikipedian, Historian, and Friend? 16:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedian, Historian, and Friend? (talk · contribs) just opined "strong keep" in 27 AFD discussions over a period of 35 minutes, several times with clearly disruptive rationales. Uncle G 16:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Not nessacary. Pertainent information can be merged to List of Harvey Birdman, Attorney at Law episodes Rackabello 16:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete not needed. Acalamari 16:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. --ElKevbo 21:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.