- 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 all three - Liberatore(T) 18:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
- And also Lucky design, which appears to be a copy of Lucky Design. - Liberatore(T) 18:26, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Delete Vanity page. I am also nominating the following related page because it was created by the same user with essentially the same content.
- Nicky Miller
- I've also added Nicholas Miller -- Samir ∙
T C 08:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
RossPatterson 01:21, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete both per WP:VAIN. Royboycrashfan
01:22, 10 March 2006 (UTC) - Delete Both Vanity, ad. Basically duplicates the information on their web page, though not closely enough to be copyvio. Fan1967 02:21, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete both as nn vanity,Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 06:41, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete vanity ad. --Terence Ong 08:17, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, and I've added Nicholas Miller as well. Vanity. -- Samir ∙ T C 08:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete all three. Nicky Miller and Nicholas Miller go under WP:VANITY, while Lucky Design goes under both WP:VANITY and does not comply with criteria in WP:WEB.---Marcus- 10:23, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- DeleteAbsolutely no value in this article. --Wisden17 17:36, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete all as spam. Just zis Guy you know? 22:05, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- Delete and all associated SPAM. -- Oarias 03:48, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
- 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.