Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hacker standard time

Patent nonsense. Delete, candidate for speedy deletion. - Mike Rosoft 21:07, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

• Speedy delete Not necessarily nonsense, but certainly vandalism. It's also a repost. --Aurochs (Talk | Block)
• As far as I can tell it wasn't deleted validly in the first place, thus the fact that it's a repost isn't of much interest. Christopher Parham (talk) 21:29, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
• In my opinion, it was a valid CSD G3 deletion. I'll admit that this is borderline vandalism, but the deletion seems to have been proper. --Aurochs (Talk | Block)
• Delete unless sources are provided. Doesn't appear to be a candidate for speedy deletion, certainly is not vandalism. Christopher Parham (talk) 21:13, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per above and protect from recreation since it has been deleted previously if the vote is to delete again. 23skidoo 22:38, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. It's not nonsense as in the speedy category, but it's the kind of nonsense where I can't figure out what the heck that article's trying to say. Mo0[talk] 22:39, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

: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.