Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Modern Odin stream

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. JForget 00:44, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Odin stream (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Oh dear. No! It's just trash made up in school one day and Wp is not.... Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:29, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, serious original research. Andrea105 (talk) 23:39, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Calling good-faith contributions "trash" isn't such a great idea for a project which relies on the public's goodwill. Polarpanda (talk) 23:47, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are absolutely right. And when I see one I do not call it trash. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, this really is trash, and very much advancing a specific POV — perhaps a bit of advertising as well. Nyttend (talk) 00:32, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, violates WP:SOAP among many other things. Favonian (talk) 09:29, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I'm going to agree that this article should be thrown in the trash, where it belongs. Angryapathy (talk) 17:12, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unsourced, non-notable POV. Edward321 (talk) 14:18, 9 December 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.