Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GEP

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 delete. Joyous 01:47, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

GEP

The links are bogus, the content, while vaguely amusing, not remotely encyclopedia. And it's not NPOV. Do I really need to say more? --Kelly Martin 16:48, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)

Delete or blank and replace with disambiguation page for this TLA (gross economic product?). Do not recreate a gay Elvis porn article. --MarkSweep 16:53, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete. JamesMLane 17:01, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Bart133 18:19, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete it's like they wanted to be in BJAODN but forgot to include the funny part. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 18:53, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Can't think of anything better to say than what Starblind said. JRM 23:24, 2005 Jan 22 (UTC)
Delete, un-encyclopaedic, POV. Megan1967 01:46, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Yes, Delete that. Wyss 07:53, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete... I'd say it looks like a lousy attempt at BJAODN too. --Idont Havaname 08:05, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Neutrality^talk 05:49, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
Delete oh god please delete it, my eyes, my eyes!
- Whose vote was this? Need a username. --Idont Havaname 01:48, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Don't delete leave it up :01:
- Whose vote was this? --Idont Havaname 01:48, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete Cute, but no thanks. Ganymead 05:09, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Stupid. Edeans 05:34, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Don't delete ok?
- Above vote was by User:217.210.78.59 -- please sign in. --Idont Havaname 22:19, 27 Jan 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.