Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gods Of War Motorcycle Club
- 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. Not a lot of participation, but it's already been listed once, and the only person arguing to keep is the article's creator, who fails to cite any policy-based reasons to keep. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:29, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Gods Of War Motorcycle Club[edit]
- Gods Of War Motorcycle Club (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
To help the article creator User:JamesT5723 understand better, and to answer issues he raised on the talk page and in edit summaries, it should be explained that having a registered trademark is in no way evidence of notability by Wikipedia's standards. Anyone can pay a fee and register a trademark.
Claims that this is one of the fastest growing clubs, is unique in its policies, or unique in other ways, only serve to make one ask why hasn't a single book, newspaper, magazine or reputable website ever written anything about this club?
It is true that there are other articles of questionable notability. Combat Veterans Motorcycle Association would probably not survive a deletion nomination, since all the coverage is WP:ROUTINE toy runs and charity events. The article Blue Angels Motorcycle Club isn't much, but the club has been the subject of ongoing press coverage for many years, mostly due to criminal activity (which is nothing to envy if you ask me). But what matters here is that other stuff exists is no help in keeping Gods Of War Motorcycle Club from being deleted. Regardless of what is wrong with some other article, the question here is whether this article meets the guidelines for notability. For that we need citations showing significant coverage, which are not published by the club, or available for purchase like a license, a trademark, or a vanity press book. Dennis Bratland (talk) 08:39, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
You mention that we are not in the papers, books etc.. well this is beciuase we are not breaking the law, & as far as I am aware.. there are people & organisations who are listed that obey the law. I had mentioned the Blue Angels, & you said "but the club has been the subject of ongoing press coverage for many years", as I pointed out.. none of the reference links etc attributed to them actually indicate this. Same can be said for Shanon Ponton, who is a trainer on the biggest loser, & all his links bar 1 fail, other than having been on personal trainer on a TV program.. what worth of notability is it. & I am not advocating that either of htese be removed, becuase even though our listing has more actual VALID links listed on our page, their is obviously thousnads of people that would find their links notworthy, where 100's might not. As for the trade mark, you actually have to go through a long process, so it's not just pay & you're done. You said "Claims that this is one of the fastest growing clubs, is unique in its policies, or unique in other ways, only serve to make one ask why hasn't a single book, newspaper, magazine or reputable website ever written anything about this club".. this is not a claim but a fact & the fact we now have locations across 3 countries in 18 monthes proves that, if you do some research you will not find another Military MC that is not 1%, not controlled by one, that admits all service personnel only, from any country, male or female.. & caters for disabled veterans that are unable to ride any more.. That makes us Unique. Just becuase we don't go blowing our trumpet doesn't mean that we are not known, or we wouldn't be getting the amount of applications each day we get. We ARE listed on a reputable web site & the link is on as a reference, it is an extremely highly regarded website in the Motorcycle community, & the site is the main registry for clubs & is respected the world round, & we have been listed 3 times on it!! Claims of notability are subject to personal view, & as I agree that criminal activity isn't something to envy, you seem to advocate that unless a club does something wrong then then are not notworthy, the club has a very good reputation, & is also able to remain netural in around outlaw club, which in its self is it notable.. what one person may not class & notworthy may be to hundred of thousands of others. we get dozens of applcations each day from around the world & have approved yet another location only yesterday in Rowley Regis UK, so it we were certainly notworthy for enough people to wish to establish there. User:JamesT5723 23:47, 28 July 2016
- Hi James, please read our guidelines for notability, particularly the part about clubs that Dennis linked. Clubs (including MCs) don't need to commit crimes to be covered by the news. If you can find coverage of your club's participation in a major event, that could help to establish some for of notability. Has the MC led any charity events or protests? Those would be a good place to start. For now, though, I'm voting Delete. Jergling (talk) 14:25, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
- Delete -- no coverage in RS can be found; non-notable subject & fails GNG. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:54, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 07:15, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 07:15, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti Talk 13:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
- @JamesT5723: Your !vote carries no weight unfortunately.. Please have a look at this. Regards—UY Scuti Talk 13:23, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
- 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.