Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Auditors Class XII
- 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 the article i.e. all previous revisions of the page. Whether or not there ought to be a redirect newly created is left as a matter of editorial discretion. Skomorokh 23:16, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Auditors Class XII (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
"Auditors Class XII" as the original article that was created, contained only wholly-unsourced material that seemed to serve only as promotional spam. "Auditors Class XII" is not a plausible search term, and therefore it should not be redirected but instead deleted. The whole page is just one big Wikipedia:Vanispamcruftisement. Cirt (talk) 21:05, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Meh. It's at least conceivable that someone (a scientologist, or a person who knows enough about scientology's work with celebrities to look for this term) would search for this term. Redirects are cheap. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The only purpose of it is promotional spam. Not appropriate use of a page. Cirt (talk) 21:35, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Unlikely redirect. XXX antiuser eh? 04:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Implausible search term. Shouldn't this have been listed at WP:RfD? Swarm(Talk) 06:41, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Because I also wanted to address the issues of the content from the page. Cirt (talk) 17:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, I understand. Swarm(Talk) 20:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. :) Cirt (talk) 20:33, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, I understand. Swarm(Talk) 20:31, 9 February 2010 (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.