Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skeleton garlands
The links in the articles are minimal.  At least two of them are to sites whose interest in Halloween is commercial - they are selluing stuff.  Those links are borderline .  The Squeaky Rat article has no citations, at all, not even questionable ones.  The main arguments in favour of retention are rhetoric, not factual, and wikipedia is not built upion rehteoric, but upon citable, sigificant research of others, not Original research.  If the articles can be shown to be notable articles about notable items or concepts than I will have no hesitation in withdrawing nominations for those articles.  So far I have seen nothing to change my mind
— User:Timtrent, 07:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:SPAM (Wikipedia:Spam)