Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Repcillin

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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 15:11, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Contested prod. non notable with only 90 Google hits WP 04:36, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as blatant advertising for non-notable product. Links to this article from other articles should be removed too. dbtfz^talk 04:48, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I took the liberty of removing the spamlinks from other articles (except for Crocodile oil, which should also be deleted as part of the attempt to exploit Wikipedia as a medium for free advertising). dbtfz^talk 04:58, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• weak keep minor interest. --MacRusgail 04:50, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as advertisement for a non-notable product. --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 04:56, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Bucketsofg 05:25, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. --Khoikhoi 05:44, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete in the same manner as Crocodile oil.  (aeropagitica)  06:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, though there are only 26 unique hits and several hits on the first page are Wikipedia. Royboycrashfan 06:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as advertising. topynate 00:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.