Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rosary and scapular
- 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 keep. (non-admin closure) — JL 09 talkcontribs 02:17, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Rosary and scapular (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)
- Duplicates content from:
Malke 2010 (talk) 04:57, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep per WP:SK #2.4, as being discussed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blessed Virgin Mary (Roman Catholic). This article's Afd is part of a larger, "mass Afd issue" being discussed at length here. Please see that page so the same discussion does not get repeated on multiple pages. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 12:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: There is no such "mass AfD issue" being discussed on the AfD for Blessed Virgin Mary (Roman Catholic). Everyone should focus only on the merits of either deleting or keeping this article. Note also, the usual "supporters" on all the articles. Thanks. Malke 2010 (talk) 14:43, 1 December 2010 (UTC)Malke 2010 (talk) 14:43, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Note the the usual "nominator" for the deletion tags. --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep per WP:SK #2.4. Content dispute and WP:POINT best worked out elsewhere. Marauder40 (talk) 14:45, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep As stated above, content dispute and WP:POINT are best worked out somewhere else. The same discussion is now occuring on so many pages.. this "battle" Malke is issuing is rediculous. --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I do not see the controversy. Keep, whether this is a content fork or not. Bearian (talk) 21:33, 2 December 2010 (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.