Call of Duty Wiki:Articles for Deletion

Articles for Deletion is where anyone can nominated an article to be deleted for whatever reason, and everyone decides if it should. To bring the article up for deletion, add "" to the top of the respective article, and make a subsection on this page about it.

If the article qualifies to speedy deletion, use "" instead, and don't make a subsection here. An administrator will find it and take care of it.

5.7x28mm
Reason- No point. This article tells us nothing except what ammunition the P90 uses. In my opinion, this article is actually spam.

Callofduty4 |    What you after?  08:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose While it doesn't tell us anything more than what ammo the P90 uses, deleting it will do little good. If it is deleted, somebody will remake it with the same amount of minimal detail. We should keep it and let users slowly expand on it. Darkman 4 13:11, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Keep - It may be really short now, but many articles start out that way. Just wait for someone to come along and add more content to it. 20:01, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Browning .30 cal
Support as nominator. This article already exists. It should be deleted, or merged with M1919 Callofduty4 |    What you after?  09:48, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Support multiple pages for the same thing is messed up.   Akyoyo    Talk  22:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

9x19mm
This has been overlooked for some time. There are two articles for the same thing. The other article is called 9x19 Parabellum.

Support as nominator

Support - Either delete because of dup or redirect. --I Ross I 18:27, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Support - Multiple pages for the same thing is messed up.   Akyoyo    Talk  22:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Katushya rocket
There article already exists. It should be deleted, or merged with Katyusha rocket launcher.

Support as nominator

Support only referenced in one line in COD5.

Well, it was already merged, but I'd like to say that they also appear multiple times in the Finest Hour Russian campaign. So, they aren't only seen a few times in World at War. Anywho, even if they were only mentioned once or twice, we should still have an article on them. 22:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Kiefer Sutherland
We don't need this article. There is a perfectly good article on him on wikipedia.

Support as nominator

Opposed, Famous actor voicing a role in a Call of Duty game, its fine

Oppose - He does the voice in CoD:WaW, and the article here is perfectly fine, no reason to delete. --I Ross I 18:29, 31 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, my bad, the article is in pretty bad shape, but if it were fixed and some info added, I think it would be pretty good. --I Ross I 18:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Support The article is in terrible shape, we could just link to Wikipedia, and we don't need an article on him in the first place.   Akyoyo    Talk  22:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Category:Modern Warfare 2
This category and both of its subcategories (Modern Warfare 2 Characters and Modern Warfare 2 Weapons) are not used by any articles. They are redundant and break the scheme addressing all products by their full title, such as Category:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.

FarmerBob12 17:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Call of Duty Wiki: Blocking Policy
This page is not remotely accurate in regards to our blocking policy. Besides, I feel that having a strict policy in regards to blocking will handicap the admin's ability to effectively deal with vandals and the like.

Support as nominator. Darkman 4 19:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Support --Cpl. Callofduty4 20:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Comment/Opposed Its not like its followed anyway. Looking back at how blocks are dealed with on this wiki since I wrote that more than a year ago blocks are stricter than what the policy dictates, not the other way around. Saying that you guys should re do it, not delete it, so admins have a policy to follow, not do whatever the hell they feel like to win an arguement agaisnt a non authority, which Ive seen done several times, with Admins not acting like admins but acting like children when they block

Edward (Doctor's assistant)
If Dr.Rictofen really is Edward I don't think we shold have this article.

Support as nominator. -- 1:30, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Support - I'm surprised no one did that after the merge.   SgM.   Akyoyo    Talk