Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/"x"-taur

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. 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 - deleted - SimonP 15:05, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

"x"-taur

Seems to have been made up on the spot. Orange Goblin 20:30, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

• Delete the furcruft. Kelly Martin 20:31, May 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Pretty much the same as Taur, so redirect. --Conti|✉ 20:32, May 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • No point in a redirect - there's nothing on google, so I doubt anyone would search for it! Orange Goblin 20:32, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
    • Right, delete then. --Conti|✉ 21:31, May 15, 2005 (UTC)
• no reason for existence delete - Algebraist 20:37, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and remove new link from taur. No source for the term. DoubleBlue (Talk) 21:26, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Unnotable furcruft. Nestea 22:16, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Almost a speedy, owing to the illiterate nonsensicality of the use of the terms body and torso (both words refer to the same thing). --Tony Sidaway|Talk 06:32, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, merge content to Furry if not already there 66.94.94.154 13:04, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, because it's 1) an invented term exactly equivalent to Taur and therefore 1a) has nothing to say that doesn't belong in taur. (disclaimer: I helped create the taur article.) —Muke Tever 02:04, 17 May 2005 (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 the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.