- 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. fails WP:WEB, site was made in retaliation to WP rmv wikiality references. --Madchester 10:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- See also Talk:Wikiality and Wikireality (AfD discussion)
Vanispamcolbertcruftisement for non-notable web site, no claim per WP:WEB, google finds no incoming links, no Alexa rank, no verifiable reliable sources cited. Deprodded. Weregerbil 14:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Erechtheus 15:02, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete and salt — Dark Shikari talk/contribs 15:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. SNOWball this please. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 15:55, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Stephen Colbert. Attic Owl 16:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect per Attic Owl. --NeoChaosX (talk | contribs) 19:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete and leave no redirect. Andrew Levine 19:31, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I find the concept of this Wiki funny, but considering that this is the only google hit for "wikiality.com" and does not assert notability, no way it satisfies WP:WEB. I do not see how a redirect is necessary because the website is essentially just a fan site for Colbert himself.-- danntm T C 19:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete vanity for a non-notable website. Konman72 20:10, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Dont Delete The site is still young and should be given more time, Also it is not really simply a Colbert fan site.Sultangris 07:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The site has as much time as its owner is willing to pay xyr hosting company for. Giving the web site time has nothing to do with giving the web site an encyclopaedia article. Please base your arguments on our Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. Uncle G 09:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Could be a good project, a sort of Uncyclopedia for The Colbert Report, but for now it isn't notable enough. Good luck to them, though. JDoorjam Talk 09:02, 7 August 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.