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 SPEEDY DELETED. dbenbenn | talk 20:37, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Entire article consists of an exact duplicate of the Wiktionary entry. I had initially speedied it at another user's request, but since I'm not entirely certain (on reflection) that it's OK to speedy it, I'm putting it here. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 23:44, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. It's only a list of two broken links --Neigel von Teighen 23:44, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Actually, none of the articles in fundamental deal with fundamental in the sense that is meant in fundamentally, so I suppose, in a way, it would do harm... as in being an inaccurate redirect. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:00, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)
If you look at Talk:Fundamentally You'll see that the article was created by mistake by the author, who added a speedy delete request to the talk page. So it seems it would qualify under the new speedy delete rules, uder sole author request. Paul August ☎ 00:20, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)
Hehe, I just noticed that on my own and came here to inform everyone. D'oh. Speedying it now. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:29, Jan 29, 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.