I was going to revert what looked like vandalism, but the original is still defamitory and vain. Not sure if it could be rewritten, or is worth trying. It's been further updated, and it's definatly vainity. Should be a cut and dried Delete --InShaneee 04:03, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Rapidly becoming an extension of this site, no encyclopedic content. Andrewa 16:54, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Vanity/spam. Delete. - Mike Rosoft 18:53, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete, ad, probable vanity. Wyss 21:05, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Anyone can do a customized phpBB board and stick it on Wikipedia if we allow this one. Stombs 01:37, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
Do not delete. Anyone can do a customized phpBB board and stick it on Wikipedia, which we should encourage, by not deleting this fantastic entryGunther 01:37, Jan 16, 3005 (UTC)
Comment: Fascinating. The above signature was forged, but the user in question has no contributions at all. The IP responsible, not surprisingly, has several, all related to this incident. No change of vote. Andrewa 12:47, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Vanity. JoaoRicardo 05:25, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Comment: Anons have now blanked both this VfD subpage, which I have reverted, and the page which is the subject of this vote, leaving only the VfD warning. There seems no point in restoring the subject page. No change of vote. Andrewa 12:19, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
