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 The result of the debate was withdrawn. This VFD was withdrawn due to the fact that 2100 was vandalized. -- AllyUnion(talk) 12:42, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Thanks; didn't see that; vfd withdrawn Lectonar 12:34, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Comment - there are many individual years articles in Wikipedia going right up to individual years several centuries hence. You'd need to put a VfD on a lot of pages. If someone has an astronomical prediction to make for the year 2100, or if a piece of fiction takes place in that year, it makes it a valid article. See, for example 2525. 23skidoo 15:44, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
There aren't actually very many beyond 2100 - see User:Sjorford/Future years for a list. Most are redirects to non-year pages, and 2525 is one of the few exceptions. If there is any information for 2100 (and note that the recent update didn't add anything beyond "2100 is the last year of the 21st century"), then it can go on 21st century until there's enough to warrant a whole page. sjorford:// 20:02, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Comment': Did you ever live near the Church Universal and Triumphant? They made predictions of the end of the world occurring in each of several years of the 1990s. If you review enough science fiction, there are stories taking place in virtually every future year for several thousand years. Keeping an article on every year reference (rather than only the most intrinsically noteworthy) wouldn't be an efficient use of WP. Barno 20:36, 10 Feb 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.