Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Secret Service codenames: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→[[Secret Service codenames]]: comment: delete |
|||
Line 12:
*'''Comment''' I believe the discussion here is about whether this is encyclopedic or not. If it is poorly sourced, that should be fixed, but it isn't a critera for deletion. [[User:Johnn 7|Johnn 7]] 19:33, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' The point i'm trying to make is that it the sources is incorrect and thus should be removed leaving something which is unsourced and also thus leaving nothing there so in a nutshell there is no article. [[User:DXRAW|DXRAW]] 20:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
*'''Delete''', but ''not'' per nom. This is at the moment just a list, and not a useful source of information on things such as how the codenames are given or when they are given. However, I am certain that a point like "some of the information in this article is wrong" isn't a reason to delete it, as that's not what [[WP:RS]] says. It says that reliable sources must be found. So ignore the WP:RS part of the prod nomination. [[User:Wittyname|Wittyname]] 21:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
| |||