LOTR:Articles for deletion/Archive 1

Neslina
Delete Not canon just like Neslar.-- 15:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Same as Neslar Razor77 15:29, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Neslar
Delete I can not find any other information on this character. Razor77 14:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete There is no reference to this character and is not canon.-- 15:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Eliac
Delete As far as I can find Eliac is only a user on a Tolkien based forum. If any one knows differently please let me know. Razor77 00:52, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - I find no other reference to Eliac.-- 15:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Friend
What is the point of this page?--Arwen Skywalker 22:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * probably been overenthusiastic at starting articles from redlinks. Although you could include something about "Speak, friend and enter" at the door to Moria Gimli 12:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Rewriten by KingAragorn. Removed from Current nominations. Razor77 13:37, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Amon gharn, Bethil, Mugwort, Hithlain
Delete I can not find any reference to these, all created by anon User:84.92.85.222. They are not listed at the Encyclopedia of Arda. Gimli 23:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete As far as I could research Amon gharn and Bethil are totally false entries and should be deleted.--Gigo 13:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Mugwort and Hithlain are now listed at the Encyclopedia of Arda (Mugwort and Hithlain respectively). I have rewritten them accordingly.--Gigo 13:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete I agree with Gigo on deleting Amon gharn and Bethil. I can't find a reference to them anywhere.  Darth Plagueis 15:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Deleted Amon gharn and Bethil, but keep Mugwort and Hithlain.-- 11:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Doon (novel)
Delete Not something that belongs on this wiki. It is only tangentally connected to Lord of the Rings Razor77 02:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

This page doesn't even have anything on it! Delete it. Darth Plagueis 01:04, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Author blanked page - Deleted Razor77 01:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

The Years Articles
Are all of these year articles (such as S.A. 3300 or something) really necessary when we have a timeline of events in the wiki? Darth Plagueis 00:06, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * keep I think the year pages, especially those with multiple events and links, are good starting points for learning about events and have the potential to cover them in more detail than a timeline. They can also be easier to deal with than a complete timeline.
 * Keep I will admit that at least some of my vote is due to ego. I have put a lot of time into the date pages on this Wiki. Having said that, I also think that it is important to have them on this Wiki.  First, they provide a way of showing how some events are related to each other.  Second, I feel that Tolkien loved dates.  In fact, I think that it would be fair to say that dates were second in interest only to the languages that he created for the novels.  With that in mind, I feel that leaving the date pages is a small thing to do in order to honor that love.  I have created a page that is designed to be a style guide to show how date pages should be laid out.  Hopefully, it will provide some consistancy to the pages.  That page can be found at LOTR:Dates. Razor77 23:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep they can include more information than would fit in the timeline Gimli 13:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the suggestion. Darth Plagueis 01:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Siege
I don't think a page listing seiges is really necessary. But doesn't voting belong on the talk page of the article? Duke Starhopper 00:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with Duke. We're not really big enough to have this system yet. Robin Patterson 07:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Its just that its good to have some sort of content that isnt sporked from wikipedia, pages on things like this were made from redlinks on articles & they can have exclusive LOTR content. It might be useful to keep discussion of deletion together, if an article gets deleted doesnt its talk page get deleted too? Gimli 12:01, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * So do we vote here or the talk page? Are you talking about the voting on talk pages system, Robin? Duke Starhopper 20:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I think we should vote here to keep this info together. pasting the votes from talk page below: Gimli 01:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete I don't think a page like this is really necessary. Possibly a disambiguation page, leading to articles called "The siege of whatever" Duke Starhopper 00:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as a disambig page, but that would require articles for the sieges (more of which could be added later) Duke Starhopper 20:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep as disambig sounds like a good idea Gimli 12:07, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Removed AfD template form the page Razor77 22:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Moar frodo
I blanked the 84k vandalism. -- I am Jack's username, 2006-08-13t05:45z
 * Deleted Gimli 06:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * removed link to deleted page Razor77 22:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Gay Picture
by user:203.45.55.109 who also did the above. -- I am Jack's username, 2006-08-14t13:37z
 * Deleted Gimli 06:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
 * removed link to deleted page Razor77 22:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Posthumously
What is the point of this page, besides that a couple pages link to it? Gimli 14:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Deleted page and directed the links to Wikipedia Razor77 18:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)