Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CHH
CHH[edit]
This looks like some personal essay or just plain nonsens to me, or maybe I'm getting tierd and just don't understand what I'm reading. What has the title to do with the contents of the artcile? I can't see any realtion and that is my main reason for nominating this. It isn't searchable, and nothing links here. Jeltz 21:50, 2004 Dec 14 (UTC)
- Delete, fragment, possible newbie test. Wyss 22:53, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Some kind of POV personal essay. Looks like some kid's homework. [[User:David Johnson|David Johnson [T|C]]] 23:42, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Delete makes no sense as it stands. Kappa 23:44, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Now this could be speedy deleted. It fits the nonsense criterion to a T. Dr Zen 01:12, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Delete: Wish it could be speedied, but this is not what the "nonsense" criterion usually means. These are valid sentences (mostly), but they appear to related to a journalism class somewhere. No question about deleting, though. Geogre 01:17, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I agree that they are "valid sentences" but would you agree that they make macrogibberish? In the same way that a random string of characters would make a gibberish sentence, a random string of sentences would make a gibberish article?Dr Zen 01:53, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Honestly, they DO sort of make sense... it appears to be an analysis of journalistic reaction/coverage of a political event. Although I do agree that the macrogibberish you refer to above *would* constitute patent nonsense. (for example: "The tree was tall. Afterwards, the lion crept up on the monkey. The DOW Jones was down today.") --Dante Alighieri | Talk 02:01, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
- Comment: Yes, I do think that the result is gibberish, but the fellow who was dropping Irish Civil War textbook clippings was worse in that regard. It's one of those areas where I never protest if someone speedies and where I will very occasionally speedy delete something myself, but it's also something where, if it's challenged, I have to admit that it should go through VfD. Geogre 18:20, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I agree that they are "valid sentences" but would you agree that they make macrogibberish? In the same way that a random string of characters would make a gibberish sentence, a random string of sentences would make a gibberish article?Dr Zen 01:53, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Speedied. User test. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 17:08, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)