Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Council of Sirmium

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Council of Sirmium[edit]

Council of Sirmium was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. 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 keep.

Expand significantly, or delete Jschwa1 12:17, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete. imo this is a speedy. Sander123 12:25, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. This should have been speedied, it's a classic case of a valid article title where the content as it stands now is worse than having nothing at all (in which case we'd have a red link on other articles that someone might click in order to create a valid article) -- Ferkelparade π 13:33, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Support speedy (already done by someone else), entire contents were infamous. Andrewa 19:38, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep (change of vote for new article). Great work. Andrewa 19:36, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. I have written a new article on the Council of Sirmium. There were actually four councils of Sirmium between 347 and 359 which focussed on the dispute between Arianism, Semi-Arians and supporters of the traditional Christian position in the Nicene Creed. The most famous is the 357 Council of Sirmium which temporarily upheld the Arianist position but all four are notable. I have added the VFD tag to the article so that it can be discussed further here. Capitalistroadster 10:44, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • Since the old (useless) article has already been speedied and the new article is clearly keep-worthy, I don't think we have to continue the discussion on the new article, but just in case, I change my vote to Keep the new article -- Ferkelparade π 10:58, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep the new article. Jeltz 11:44, 2004 Dec 14 (UTC)
  • Keep and remove from vfd. Samaritan 16:26, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Yet another fine save by Capitalistroadster. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 17:41, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep new article. That one-word nonsense listing was surely done by a vandal bot. We can thank that particular one for finding a glaring red link and thank Capitalist Roadster for a fantastic article. - Lucky 6.9 23:04, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep it, obviously. Wyss 12:36, 16 Dec 2004 (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 on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.