Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antiforbidden fruit effect

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 of the debate was delete. Johnleemk | Talk 12:53, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Antiforbidden fruit effect[edit]

I'm not sure this term actually exists. I can't verify it anywhere, and it's had the "unsourced" tag for over 4 months. Joyous | Talk 23:39, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as copyvio. It appears to be real, but it's an exact copy of that page. Rory096 00:07, 2 February 2006 (UTC) Delete, as it has no real Google hits. Rory096 01:03, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that page is a mirror of the Wikipedia article. They give credit at the bottom of the page. Joyous | Talk 00:55, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, didn't see that. My bad. Rory096 01:03, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and maybe delete "forbidden fruit effect" too. —This user has left wikipedia 01:25 2006-02-02
I saw that there was a similar article. I didn't tag that one because I've at least heard of the phrase "forbidden fruit," but I don't know about it as an official "effect." They're both created by the same author, for whatever that's worth, and both are similarly unsourced. Joyous | Talk 16:50, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete definitely failing WP:NOR and has the distinct whiff of WP:BALLS. Stifle 16:33, 3 February 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.