Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Explanation of Global Warming
- 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.Blnguyen | rant-line 02:25, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Blatant POV and OR. NawlinWiki 12:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete per nom. Not quite A1 territory, unfortunately. Tevildo 12:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete/Grade F as per nom. Recommend student takes remedial summer classes Bwithh 12:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong delete because it just barely misses speedy. I'm curious, though, how can an article with actual content be labeled for a POV dispute? - Che Nuevara: Join the Revolution 12:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete for no context and blatant nonsense. Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 13:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Just some person's opinion. Violation of WP:NPOV, and we already have an article at global warming. Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Now that the POV has been removed, it's just a graph that could be rolled into the global warming article. Sky 15:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as an empty page, save for a graph that could be added to Global warming. (aeropagitica) (talk) 16:12, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge graph to Global warming. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 23:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge That graph might have use in Global warming. Either that or just delete it. I did not mean to cause any trouble. — --Sln3412 17:11, 14 July 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.