- 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 as per consensus. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Hutstep (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:MADEUP Ironholds (talk) 10:22, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. --Lithorien (talk) 11:24, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - per nom. contested PROD, I suppose?--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 12:33, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom Francium12 (talk) 12:43, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom, clearly unencyclopedic. Hut 8.5 16:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Snow Delete: Per WP:MADEUP. Joe Chill (talk) 20:37, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This is clear. Should have been CSD Capitalismojo (talk) 21:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There isn't an applicable CSD category. Ironholds (talk) 06:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Lighten up man and get real. … — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Err, no, it isn't an applicable CSD category, and try and keep your edit summaries reasonable. Ironholds (talk) 17:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- G3. Pure vandalism. This includes blatant and obvious misinformation, and blatant hoaxes. Capitalismojo (talk) 00:37, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Who says it's a hoax? I'm sure some moron does dance like a fool when drunk. Ironholds (talk) 11:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I would say that it is "blatant and obvious misinformation". Also it is about the drunken activities of a real person Richard Hutton of London. (Hence Hutstep) Especially in clubs and on busses over the last 2-3 months. Thus should also be csd a7. Capitalismojo (talk) 14:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "misinformation" is err. Bullshit. So saying it's misinformation is saying it isn't true, which is saying it's a hoax, which is answered above. An article about the activities of a person is not about the person - one could say that the Campbell Case was about the actions of individuals, it doesn't mean those individuals are the subject. Ironholds (talk) 14:13, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I would say that it is "blatant and obvious misinformation". Also it is about the drunken activities of a real person Richard Hutton of London. (Hence Hutstep) Especially in clubs and on busses over the last 2-3 months. Thus should also be csd a7. Capitalismojo (talk) 14:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Who says it's a hoax? I'm sure some moron does dance like a fool when drunk. Ironholds (talk) 11:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- G3. Pure vandalism. This includes blatant and obvious misinformation, and blatant hoaxes. Capitalismojo (talk) 00:37, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Err, no, it isn't an applicable CSD category, and try and keep your edit summaries reasonable. Ironholds (talk) 17:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Lighten up man and get real. … — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There isn't an applicable CSD category. Ironholds (talk) 06:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I would have speedily deleted it as {{db-hoax}}. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 17:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think it's a hoax, merely utterly insignificant. Hut 8.5 17:56, 25 August 2009 (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.