Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pankration (Holiday)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 was snowball delete. This discussion has spawned a lot of confusion and some rancor. As to the confusion, the repeated references to Wikipedia is not for things made up one day have made it appear that Wikipedia's standard for inclusion is existence. It's not. Instead, the issue here is notability, and it is measured by the existence of independent reliable sources. In this discussion the only one that has been offered (the Facebook page and website don't count as independent) is this dead link to an article in the Arkansas Traveler, a student newspaper. But that has not swayed the consensus in the discussion, which is trending heavily and irreversibly delete. Where a discussion is certain to lead to only one outcome, it's time to close it.--chaser (talk) 05:47, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pankration (Holiday)[edit]

Pankration (Holiday) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not appear notable. No working references, no relevant Google hits. Author of article appears to be (or related to) the claimed inventor of the 'holiday'. PROD declined by a different editor and added a new reference, which is broken. Singularity42 (talk) 12:10, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aah, the joy of people writing blogs to complain about my actions. It seems my Wikipedia life is now reflecting my real life... :) Singularity42 (talk) 20:44, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Only claim is to be notable within the University of Arkansas and the broken link suggests that it is less notable than that. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:15, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep this page As a participant in this years Pankration, I am a strong advocate of this wikipedia page. This holiday is spreading very quickly and most of the people in my fraternity now plan on celebrating this holiday. It is growing and is now in the process of spreading to other campuses and filtering down to high school students as well. This is legitiment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rebelstriker (talk • contribs) 00:50 8 November 2009
  • — Rebelstriker (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:11, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep While I understand the premise of WP One Day guideline, and take its enforcement quite seriously, I believe that the scale on which the event is now on at least warrants a stub. I am not in any way affiliated with the events planning or creation, but I have witnessed the borderline hysteria around the campus of various Arkansas Universities. Arkansas being a state, in America. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bentonville Editor (talk • contribs) 21:46, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Any sources to support that? (Other than the broken link you added to the article, and the content-less "official" webpage you also added to the article.) Singularity42 (talk) 21:58, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies for the broken link, it has been removed until the article is posted/reposted on the website. As for the web site, I assume that's the starter page. I would hate to delete this page before the date of the event and the extent of support is shown. Even if half of the University of Arkansas campus plus small satellite gatherings at other schools observed the holiday, the number of participants would be well over 5,000. I see the problem that raises with One Day precedent that an article can't be dependent on anticipated future success, but the event has been held the past 2 years and seen exponential growth. I say give this article the 2 weeks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bentonville Editor (talk • contribs) 22:38, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If it's not notable now, then it should be deleted. If it becomes notable in the future, the article's existence can be re-addressed. But there is not one single relevant Google hit or reference that supports this article. Nothing at all! An article cannot exist on someone's say so. And I have to point out what RHaworth noted: if a search of the university's own newspaper comes up with zero hits, that tells you just how made up this really is. Singularity42 (talk) 22:45, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Since you are directing your comments to me, let me be crystal clear: Wikipedia needs reliable sources to support notability. Just provide one. So far, every SPA who has been challenged on this can't seem to find one. Singularity42 (talk) 03:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Singularity is obviously the editor with the most experience with an interest in this subject for whatever reason. So I would defer to him in this case and ask any editors with extensive knowledge on the subject to meet his demands. But also, I would like to present this respectfully, before we take too harsh of a tone in this debate. "New users acting in good-faith often edit topics in which they have a general interest. Such accounts warrant particularly gentle scrutiny before accusing them of any breach of official policies and content guidelines. Indeed, some new users may be unaware that editing a single topic, and in the process adding their own views, may lead to some editors giving less weight to their ideas in article discussions." --Bentonville Editor (talk) 04:16, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh... I am not making any demands. I am simply asking if there are any sources that support the subject of this article. It is a fairly reasonable request, considering it is the principal policy for having a Wikipedia article. I am also starting to get a bit tired of all the comments directed to me personally, both here, on this page's talk page, and on my user talk page. Singularity42 (talk) 04:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
From my talk page: "The comment was not intended to be rude, just to show that sources are not always needed to know that something exists. Pankration is obviously real and many people take part in it, why not just let the page stay? Half man half rancor". I had previously deleted the comment but have restored it.--chaser (talk) 06:16, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ATTENTION: No other recognized Holidays were made up. I truly did not know this, thank you for enlightening us. Half Man Half Rancor (Mancor) 06:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Half man half rancor (talk • contribs)

thats kind of a lack of reasoning on this one. He's basically saying that by the knowledge of its' existence by several people it is indeed real as opposed to some kind of hope you have that this is an elaborate attempt to fool you. The fact that there is indeed an event set up on facebook should show that it's real. And seeing how this is indeed the third annual official occurance, shows that this wasn't made up. I simply don't understand —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weyeserthanu (talk • contribs) 06:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Have you all read Wikipedia:Notability and still not understood it? In brief, to be included, something has to have been covered in multiple reliable third party sources, like newspapers or major media sources. Otherwise, a given topic has not gotten enough notice to warrant an article. Just existing doesn't cut it.--chaser (talk) 07:06, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; the image on the page gives me serious reservation, and the two "sources" aren't enough to have housebroken me on. Sorry, chummers, but as much as I like video games and tabletop roleplaying, I see nil in the way of usable sources. -Jeremy (v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!) 06:25, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr. Wikipedia, Is the fact that there is an event on facebook and official t-shirts not enough to show that this holiday is taking place? Half Man Half Rancor (Mancor) 07:17, 10 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Half man half rancor (talk • contribs)

Neither I or anyone else here are Mr. Wikipedia, chummer, and whether the event happens is irrelevant - the main question is that of notability. If you can't prove notability, then the article's destined for the body bank. -Jeremy (v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!) 07:26, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, there's not a Mr. Wikipedia? That sounds like a WP:MADEUP then, wouldn't you say? Half Man Half Rancor (Mancor) 17:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't get what you're trying to say, but I'll do my damnedest to suss it out: Calling people "Mr. Wikipedia" is worthless as a term or insult because the only people who have any claim to it (Sanger and Wales) are not in this discussion. Now, lemme give you some advice: Drop the adversarial attitude posthaste. -Jeremy (v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!) 20:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. This is not a hoax 2. If it were a hoax, it would be retarded 3. You are right, this page would soil the holy sanctity of all things reliable AKA Wikipedia Half man half rancorr talk 17:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chummer, you're starting to troll. Stop it. -Jeremy (v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!) 20:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Can always be recreated as and when it satisfies WP:N. Karenjc 17:12, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep There is a website for it. Just throwing it out there. Seems like "1" source, even if it is weak. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.184.251.50 (talk) 20:04, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a note, RHaworth did, in fact create a page, International Sand Sculpture Festival, because he had an self interest in it. And his edits and status dwarf those here. --130.184.251.50 (talk) 20:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How is RHaworth's article relevant here? He's an established user. -Jeremy (v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!) 20:52, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That RHaworth created it is irrelevant to its notability, which is the real reason it hasn't been deleted at AFD.--chaser (talk) 22:06, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, [1]- I don't think this would have sparked this type of instant debate had it been created by an established user. At the very least it wouldn't have been smacked with a speedy deletion from the start. --Bentonville Editor (talk) 21:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is that International Sand Sculpture Festival is an eminently notable subject created and maintained by established editors with histories of constructive participation. As opposed to the subject of this discussion which is some non-notable kegger/gamerfest. Sharpness blunted per a request on my talkpage. But if you guys can provide reliable sources which establish notability then the article will remain. Crafty (talk) 21:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am not so sure about notability in this case. The sources are blogs and websites, and I couldn't find any press coverage. I admit I didn't look too hard, but I am just not sure that this would survive an AfD. Hans Adler 21:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Hans, I agree with you. I'm just saying if they can find WP:RS. Which seems riotously improbable. :) Crafty (talk) 21:47, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why thank you Crafty for not making this personal and generalizing. It's much appreciated. So you say the International Sand Sculpture Festival is eminently notable huh? Well according to this link from its' own web page, [2] has only 60 participant. As shown by the facebook event page[3] there are 79 confirmed participants at the time of this post. So does that make this event exceed an eminently notable status? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weyeserthanu (talk • contribs) 22:07, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Numbers don't matter, chummer. Press coverage, on the other hand... -Jeremy (v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!) 23:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFF alert. Karenjc 22:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The number of participants is not how we define notability. It is the amount of coverage in independent third-party sources that matters.--chaser (talk) 22:33, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I never "smacked [this article] with a speedy deletion from the start". I added a proposed deletion tag, which is very different. Singularity42 (talk) 21:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. Stop calling me a "chummer" i have no idea what it is, but im pretty sure it violates my constitutional right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment. 2. Singularity42, I see you are avoiding my challenge to prove that you are in fact a human.... Half Man Half Rancor (Mancor) 01:11, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

And I see you're still trolling, chummliechen. My speech isn't cruel and unusual punishment any more than you calling Singularity inhuman is; the difference is mine isn't a personal attack. -Jeremy (v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!) 02:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding from your conversation with Chaser was that you made the comment to make some strange point about reliable sources, not directed at me personally. If it was directed at me personally, then I find it and your continued reliance on it rude and off-topic, and ask for you to remove it. In any event, the continued instance of you and others to direct your comments at me personally is distracting to this discussion and contrary to Wikipedia behavioural guidelines for editors. Singularity42 (talk) 01:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This got out of hand quickly.--Bentonville Editor (talk) 05:01, 11 November 2009 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pankration_(Holiday)&oldid=1143704191"