- 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 speedily deleted by Pilotguy. For future reference, you can replace speedy-delete tags if they're removed by the author. No need to push the article through AFD. Zetawoof(ζ) 03:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete: This article is complete nonsense. It says "similar to throwing a pile of papers in the air and them picking them all up and hoping that they are in order". I nominated it for Speedy Deletion, but an anonymous IP address removed the notice, so I Proposed it for Deletion. The article's creator removed the ProD. It is annoying when people force us to go through such bother. The creator has done three things on Wikipedia: created another article that was Speedily Deleted, uploaded an image that was Speedily Deleted, and created this nonsense article that should be Speedily Deleted. It boils down to vandalism. Hu 12:09, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. "Wikipedia is not for something made up in school one day". Sam Blacketer 12:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - yeah, exactly... "Eric Sort was originally created by Eric Augustine in 2005". Not patent nonsense, but why would one write a bad sorting algorithm instead of using one from the JDK? MER-C 12:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, neologism/WP:NFT. (Not actually complete nonsense, see Bogosort.) Demiurge 12:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as per WP:NFT. Hello32020 15:04, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete. This is just a different name for bogosort. Making up a nickname for an existing algorithm does not create a new algorithm. I could make up hundreds of new names every day if I wanted to. JIP | Talk 18:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't Delete It's an interesting piece of culture, and the code is written out for this. It seems that the amount of information in this article is constantly growing. I predict that this article will iprove in importance in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChaosSonic (talk • contribs)
- Read the article bogosort. Everything that your "Eric Sort" claims to be was already invented decades ago. JIP | Talk 18:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The above endorsement for Don't Delete is made by a single purpose account ChaosSonic whose only edit is here. Folks, you are being wound up by a vandal. The article should have been removed long ago. Hu 19:12, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Aside from the clear argument that Eric Sort is merely a rediscovery of bogosort, this may also violate WP:VANITY if "3riq" is the "Eric Augustine" mentioned in the article. Dr. Submillimeter 21:55, 30 December 2006 (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.