- 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 speedily deleted as reposted material of a speculative nature. (aeropagitica) 22:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Episode is certainly not titled "Episode 307", article is blatant speculation, article goes against Lost guidelines (agreed upon via consensus) to only have verifiable information from ABC (Note: This article has previously been deleted several times as: Not in Portland and Not in Portland (Lost) (Which went through AfD)) - Speedy delete as recreation. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 09:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete per nom. Don't we have to wait until February to confirm anyways? -- Ned Scott 09:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Seems to have at least some mainstream sources that it cites, which is the usual criterion for whether we can write about a future event---quoting mainstream-media speculation is different than speculating ourselves (the links to blog speculation should be cut out, though). I'm not sure what this separate consensus on Lost is, but I don't like the idea of it having its own separate verifiability policy. --Delirium 10:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete this article shouldn't even require an AfD, it has already been deleted per AfD here:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Not in Portland (Lost) and speedy deleted many times since then. None of the references in this article have any concrete info, the name of the episode isn't even confirmed. Let this page die already. And this has nothing to do with "Lost guidelines", the page has no justification to exist under WP guidelines - this page should be deleted regardless of which show it is. --Milo H Minderbinder 14:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete as recreated material. Terence Ong 15:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Delete as recreated material.-- danntm T C 19:35, 4 December 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.