Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CWF-Pro

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. --Coredesat 01:19, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CWF-Pro

CWF-Pro (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Not notable Efed and backyard promotion. Also, the article is very poorly written. PepsiPlunge 00:18, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete It's an efed, 'nuff said. It also fails WP:N. TJ Spyke 02:04, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete No real indication of notability and it reads like spam. Leebo ^T/C 03:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Does not indicate notability whatsoever. ZBrannigan 07:24, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Non notable. It's hard to read most of it, but what can be read is WP:SPAM.--John Lake 23:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Throw this spam over the top rope. Realkyhick 03:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. simply put "It's an E-Fed", not an article on E-feds as a phenomenon or anything like that but an actual e-fed and as such does not belong on wikipedia MPJ-DK 10:16, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete WP:SPAM. The creator has the same ID as the name of the "E-fed" and has no apparent contributions save the creation of this. This article may need to be E-piledriven though an E-table. Suriel1981 02:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

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.