Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Judd Boys

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 Speedy Delete. --- Glen 16:46, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Judd Boys[edit]

The article looks like a big joke... J Ditalk 09:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - vanity. MER-C 09:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete possibly speedyable as nonsense. VegaDark 09:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete - patent nonsense, vanity, etc etc. Created by somebody at a loose end. BTLizard 09:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete for Collin's sake. 205.157.110.11 09:50, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I say keep it, a highly amusing and witty article cleverly written and excellently edited — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.144.152.66 (talk • contribs) 2006-09-08 10:30:11
  • I have taken account of what you, (the moderator's) have said, and edited the text, please can you instruct me further as to what else needs changing, in your opinion?

    In my opinion, original elements of suggested vanity have been removed, it does not violate copyright infringements, it promotes existing links, I have cited external links, and it does not advocate anything controversial.

    It contains elements of geographic and cultural interest, it is an insight into modern society, and sub culture, and is informing people on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Old Juddian (talk • contribs) 2006-09-08 10:42:33

    • What you should be doing is citing sources. You haven't cited a single source in the entire article. It appears that you are writing primary documentation, about a group of never-before-documented people, based upon firsthand experience. That is forbidden here. To prove that you are not doing that, you must cite sources. Uncle G 11:52, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think this article should remain as it is an insight to modern life and culture stemming from olden influences. Groups such as the 'Judd Boys' should be promoted in todays society as it promotes social interaction and brotherly unity. Although this may not be a movement rooted in a deep historical background it has the foundings of being so in the future so should remain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.66.238 (talk • contribs)
  • Can we move to Speedy on this? It meets criteria as nonsense and vanity. Unsigned and spurious assertions of worth aren't going to cut any ice. BTLizard 13:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete due to lack of evidence that this group satisfies WP:ORG. A small group of friends who graduated from the same school and enjoy socializing together is unlikely to be verifiable through reliable sources. --Metropolitan90 14:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • My proposal is that this ia sub-sector of a fraternity/sorority, WP:V|ORG is applicable for organisations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.192.42 (talk • contribs)
  • Speedy Delete. I assume the author is wasting our time in good faith, of course. My Alt Account 16:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for obvious reasons. An early close per WP:SNOW would seem appropriate. Any odds on whether we'll need to salt the earth? Fan-1967 19:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete as per above. There obviously won't be any sources forthcoming. wikipediatrix 23:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete Strikes me as patent nonsense. Resolute 00:13, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete Nonsense and vanity Ian Cairns 00:20, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete where's the speedy grounds? Danny Lilithborne 00:17, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete This is not Wiki material. Absolute rubbish. TGreenburg
  • I would like to comment on BT Lizards use of the word spurious. Classing other peoples opinions as spurious purely due to a differing opinion is very self righteous. Just because it's different doesn't mean it is false or wrong. I think this statement proves that this entry and others like it should stay to ensure that there remains a balance of items for people with differing opinions. The majorities tastes and opinions do not necessary suit everyone who uses this site. I stumbled upon this entry whilst writing an essay on the increasing influence of American culture on British society. One such example of this is the increasing number of such fraternity/sorority groups and gangs in modern day British culture. I found this entry very useful indeed.
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/The_Judd_Boys&oldid=1138845327"