Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Betteruse
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE. jni 15:44, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Neolgism and an advert for betteruse.org, I would redirect to recycling if I was convienced that people used the term--nixie 02:05, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Neologism and ad. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 02:31, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. An ad full of neologism. Zzyzx11 02:45, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete--ZayZayEM 03:47, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. — Trilobite (Talk) 03:54, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Tygar 06:15, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Current article is not informative. Thue | talk 08:06, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete --Haham hanuka 09:04, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete not a common term at all Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:23, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete nn spamcruft. ComCat 03:06, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.