The result was delete as the consensus indicates. Moreover, the rationales on the deletion side seem to be stronger and guideline/policy-based than on the retention side. – MuZemike 22:33, 13 October 2010 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
OK, I really have no idea whether this article should be kept or deleted. I do know, however, that it's been prodded (and I suspect should be de-prodded because I assume that the article creator contests the prod) and that it's been nominated for CSD as a hoax. I feel there's going to be more heat than light at the article until the situation is resolved, and that an AfD would be the best solution - whatever is ultimately decided. I'm therefore taking the article to AfD, while noting that I have no view about deletion either way. TFOWR 12:33, 6 October 2010 (UTC) reply
*Keep needs some work, but in the spirit of the new direction Wikipedia goes in, in which sources need not be found linking two terms in a title, but rather in which merely separate sourcing for each term is good enough.
Bus stop (
talk)
00:21, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
reply
Chesdovi ( talk) 23:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC) reply
Chesdovi ( talk) 12:05, 13 October 2010 (UTC) reply