Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outlaw 8

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 of the debate was Delete. I'm then taking the non-admin, normal editorial action of recreating as a redirect to Texas A&M University Corps of Cadets. Stifle (talk) 01:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Outlaw 8

A "brigade" of the Texas A&M University Corps of Cadets, an ROTC-esque organization. There are a number of "brigades", but I don't see how they could be considered notable; from here they look like university student groups (I can't tell if there is year-to-year continuity of the brigades). The article is completely vanity, written in the first person and mostly names, with little content that could possibly be relevant in a year or two. The suggestion to merge with Texas A&M University Corps of Cadets has been removed by the author. I don't think there's anything in here worth merging, anyway; this is a non-notable subgroup of a notable university group. Delete. bikeable (talk) 04:13, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

• I originally put out the merge on the article. At this point, I would support a redirect to Texas A&M University Corps of Cadets. Montco 04:16, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, there are a few reasons why its wrong, #1, a brigade would imply that we are army, but if you read The Corps page you would see that we are in the Wing, not the brigade. We are an outfit of the Air Force ROTC at A&M. #2, if you read closely to the A&M page, we are an Outfit. hints why there is no need to be merged with the whole corps page. each outfit has their own histroy, own legacy. which unless you are an aggie, and you where in the corps, you will not understand. considering, i havent spend much time working on it, will be updating it constenly for a while(next 3 years or so). I am trying to dig up as much information as i can, to make the page more full, of useful information. I appologise for sounding rude, but it is aggrivating that the pages hasnt even been up for 24 hours, and i am being badgered about the content not being usful. I do not intend to be rude, i am just pointing out some of the facts that you might not understand if you are not from Texas A&M Corps of Cadets. I am currently going and gathering as much information, about the outfits history, and past so i can make the page more usful to those people who might want to look.

• Weak keep if thoroughly rewritten. The article at least suggests that the group has some year to year continuity. I know next to nothing about student life at Texas A&M, other than by rumour and repute, but it may be that this is an institution similar to a fraternity or sorority, conditioned by the local quasi-military student culture. If so, it may be notable enough to pass: especially given the fact that due to conditions unique to Texas A&M, student organizations founded there are ill adapted to spread to other universities. At minimum it must be thoroughly rewritten for NPOV and preferably in the third person. Smerdis of Tlön 14:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, rotcruft. Are small university clubs genuinely notable enough for articles? RGTraynor 16:40, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Delete only because I doubt that a sub-group of a Group at a single University will be notable. Re-writing the article is a must either way.--70.10.129.182 17:26, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as a non-notable group. --InShaneee 17:35, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete without question. NN and some big ol' WP:VSCA; this group should use their own website for this and not Wikipedia. — Scm83x ^{hook 'em} 22:04, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
• Merge anything relevant to Texas A&M University Corps of Cadets and redirect. Wstaffor 22:10, 18 April 2006 (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.