Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Howda hoowah

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. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 14:13, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Original research gamecruft; non-notable with zero hits on Google. I say delete or redirect to Desert Combat. Melchoir 01:33, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• If this was 1902, would you delete Wilbur & Orville Wright's new article on a so-called "Flying Machine" because people had never heard of it before? Have some vision. -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.106.209.222 (talk • contribs) .
  • Actually, yes, we would. Melchoir 01:47, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So you'd delete their article, too, huh? You are a sad and broken man. You can have your article deletion. I suspect when you're on your deathbed you'll wish with every grain and granule of your being that during your life you were able to have vision and perspicacity about something greater than yourself. -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.106.209.222 (talk • contribs) .

• Delete as OR and gamecruft. Redirect to anywhere would be inappropriate, as there is no verification per Google that this term is commonly used among the game's fanbase; I am willing to change stance on that if verification is provided. --Kinu ^t/_c 01:54, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, feel free to purchase a copy of Battlefield 1942, install the Desert Combat mod, join an active server on the Iraqi side. Press the F1 key twice in succession and you will hear Howda Hoowah. It's part of the game, okay? People aren't going to make websites about them, they're Howda Hoowahs for chrissakes, why would they be on Google? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.106.209.222 (talk • contribs) .

• Redirect. Gamecruft unworthy of it's own article. Royboycrashfan 02:09, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Kinu. -- Vary | Talk 04:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Actually, yes, delete per Kinu. (nom) Melchoir 04:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- I guarantee you, this is no flying machine -- Samir ∙ ^T_C 05:13, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Only one vote needed per editor perhaps? Delete VirtualSteve 10:38, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per Kinu. Jude(talk,contribs) 11:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Get this GameCruft outta here Deizio 12:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. Alpha269 14:38, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per Royboycrash. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 14:49, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete for all legitimate reasons given above plus to make the point that not everything in the world is encyclopedic. Daniel Case 14:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per well argued nomination. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 21:53, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Redirect would be okay, but it seems like an unlikely search term. --Allen 22:45, 6 March 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.