Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Code of conflict

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 delete. Neutrality^talk 15:26, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable mud. --fvw* 00:22, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Don't Delete Wikipedia is an encyclopedia I thought? Shouldn't this be extended to be as true as possible. If you go to the website, it seems obvious the current article is truthful.. so then why not keep it? It's true - and if people want to know what Code of Conflict is they can find out - or otherwise other Code of Conflict definitions can be added as I see on MANY other pages ;) _{- Unsigned post by 203.109.252.196, an ISP which has vandalised numerous pages. --Blackcap | talk 05:49, 21 September 2005 (UTC)}[reply]
  • Is that a threat? --Blackcap | talk 05:49, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete nn Ashibaka (tock) 02:30, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete nn unverified. — Phil Welch 02:39, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Code of conflict.com has an Alexa rank of 1,787,348. Neopets reaches 73. Comparing the two (which is their only claim to fame) would be ludicrous. It's just one of the billions of random games put on the net. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:08, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per MgM. --Blackcap | talk 19:41, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete NN ≈ jossi ≈ 21:34, 19 September 2005 (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.