Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Broom (clean)

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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 04:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Broom (clean)[edit]

Not exactly sure why this was deproded. Anyways, the article claims that some Dutch hotels require that you sweep your own room with a "Dutch sweeping style". The whole thing strikes me (and at least one other editor who put up the prod) as highly doubtful. Note that I'm not contesting that the requirement that you clean your own room does not exist but that most likely is not as widespread as the article suggests, is not as typically Dutch and has nothing to do with a sweeping style. Pascal.Tesson 14:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Even if true (and that's unlikely), without sources, we can't take the editor's word for it. And "Broom (clean)" wouldn't be the proper title for an article about this custom, even if it were a notable one. (and it doesn't seem to be). wikipediatrix 15:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I have not spent as much time in the Netherlands as I have in other European countries, but I certainly never encountered this in my travels there. Possibly a hoax and certainly not widespread or customary even if true. Indrian 15:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. "Broom" is not a verb, and even if it was, there is no explanation in this short, trite, badly-named article to explain what a "Dutch sweeping style" is, other than that it's apparently unique. Teeters on the edge of coherence. Djcartwright 20:20, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Have been to the Netherlands on serveral occassions, never encountered this, neither has a Dutch friend I just asked, and no evidence of it at all through anything I tried on google. If true, it can't be verified by me. Dave 20:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 00:19, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --cholmes75 ^{(chit chat)} 03:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Without a reference one must presume that this is a hoax. A Train ^{take the} 14:33, 15 September 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.