Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fucking Bitch Club: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:
Vanity of non notable forum members. Sadly, not patent nonsense because it probably exists. --[[User:BesigedB|BesigedB]] <sup>([[User_talk:BesigedB|talk]])</sup> 21:57, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Vanity of non notable forum members. Sadly, not patent nonsense because it probably exists. --[[User:BesigedB|BesigedB]] <sup>([[User_talk:BesigedB|talk]])</sup> 21:57, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)


1. '''Delete''': Vanity, nonnotable. &mdash;[[User:Tregoweth|''tregoweth'']] 22:15, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
1. '''Keep''': Vanity, nonnotable. &mdash;[[User:Tregoweth|''tregoweth'']] 22:15, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)


2. '''Delete''' WP is not a humour website, and even if it exists it isn't worthy of encyclopedic inclusion. [[User:Starblind|Starblind]] 22:56, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
2. '''Keep''' WP is not a humour website, and even if it exists it isn't worthy of encyclopedic inclusion. [[User:Starblind|Starblind]] 22:56, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)


3. '''Delete'''. Not notable. 26 hits on Google, but none related to this. [[User:TigerShark|TigerShark]] 23:07, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
3. '''Keep'''. Not notable. 26 hits on Google, but none related to this. [[User:TigerShark|TigerShark]] 23:07, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)


4. '''Delete'''. Nonsense. [[User:RickK|Rick]][[User talk:RickK|K]] 23:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
4. '''Keep'''. Nonsense. [[User:RickK|Rick]][[User talk:RickK|K]] 23:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)


5. '''Delete'''. No evidence this is encyclopedic, or attempt to provide any. On the contrary, just another attempt (perhaps in good faith) to use Wikipedia as a personal blog. [[User:Andrewa|Andrewa]] 23:29, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
5. Keep. No evidence this is encyclopedic, or attempt to provide any. On the contrary, just another attempt (perhaps in good faith) to use Wikipedia as a personal blog. [[User:Andrewa|Andrewa]] 23:29, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)


: 6. '''Delete.''' Agree. [[User:Echidnae|Echidnae]] 23:59, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
* 6. '''Keep.''' Agree. [[User:Echidnae|Echidnae]] 23:59, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)


7. '''Delete''' an article about more than one person can still be vanity [[User:Pcpcpc|Philip]] 00:06, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
7. '''Keep''' an article about more than one person can still be vanity [[User:Pcpcpc|Philip]] 00:06, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)


⚫
8. '''Delete''' vanity nn. [[User:Xtra|Xtra]] 00:30, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)


⚫
8. '''Keep''' vanity nn. [[User:Xtra|Xtra]] 00:30, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)




⚫
1. '''Delete and laugh at them!''' Let it stay. It's not patent nonsense because the group and people actually do exist, and it doesn't violate the terms of service. Censoring it because you don't personally think the users are notable goes against the spirit of the Wikipedia.

⚫
1. '''Keep''' Let it stay. It's not patent nonsense because the group and people actually do exist, and it doesn't violate the terms of service. Censoring it because you don't personally think the users are notable goes against the spirit of the Wikipedia.
5:22, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
5:22, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)


2. '''Kept''': Humorous. 5:22, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
2. '''Kept''': Humorous. 5:22, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)


:[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AVotes_for_deletion%2FFucking_Bitch_Club&diff=9295911&oldid=9295039 Those two votes] both by the [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=143.229.35.161 article author]. [[User:Andrewa|Andrewa]] 23:43, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AVotes_for_deletion%2FFucking_Bitch_Club&diff=9295911&oldid=9295039 Those two votes] both by the [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=143.229.35.161 article author]. [[User:Andrewa|Andrewa]] 23:43, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)


3. '''Keep'''. Let it stay. Yes; they exist. http://www.dailyjolt.com/forum/read.html?id=218539 This forum, because it appeals to college students, experiences an ever-changing group of users. Despite this, those named to the Fucking Bitch Club are regulars and questions will inevitably arise regarding this now-endearing moniker "Fucking Bitch." An explanation available to internet users is appropriate.
3. '''Delete and laugh at them!'''. Let it stay. Yes; they exist. http://www.dailyjolt.com/forum/read.html?id=218539 This forum, because it appeals to college students, experiences an ever-changing group of users. Despite this, those named to the Fucking Bitch Club are regulars and questions will inevitably arise regarding this now-endearing moniker "Fucking Bitch." An explanation available to internet users is appropriate.


:[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Fucking_Bitch_Club&diff=9295914&oldid=9295911 This vote] by an anon with no other contributions, perhaps another forum member. [[User:Andrewa|Andrewa]] 23:47, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Fucking_Bitch_Club&diff=9295914&oldid=9295911 This vote] by an anon with no other contributions, perhaps another forum member. [[User:Andrewa|Andrewa]] 23:47, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)


:Just because something exists doesn't mean it needs an encyclopedia article. [[User:RickK|Rick]][[User talk:RickK|K]] 23:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
:Just because something exists doesn't mean it needs an encyclopedia article. [[User:RickK|Rick]][[User talk:RickK|K]] 23:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)


4. '''Keep''' . Problem does not require deletion. Such a minor branch of a subject that it doesn't deserve an article. Merge the useful content into a more comprehensive article and redirect. There is already a Wikipedia entry for the Daily Jolt. -- 00:18, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
4. '''Delete and laugh at them!''' . Problem does not require deletion. Such a minor branch of a subject that it doesn't deserve an article. Merge the useful content into a more comprehensive article and redirect. There is already a Wikipedia entry for the Daily Jolt. -- 00:18, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:43, 12 January 2005

Fucking Bitch Club

Vanity of non notable forum members. Sadly, not patent nonsense because it probably exists. --BesigedB (talk) 21:57, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

1. Keep: Vanity, nonnotable. —tregoweth 22:15, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

2. Keep WP is not a humour website, and even if it exists it isn't worthy of encyclopedic inclusion. Starblind 22:56, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

3. Keep. Not notable. 26 hits on Google, but none related to this. TigerShark 23:07, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

4. Keep. Nonsense. RickK 23:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

5. Keep. No evidence this is encyclopedic, or attempt to provide any. On the contrary, just another attempt (perhaps in good faith) to use Wikipedia as a personal blog. Andrewa 23:29, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • 6. Keep. Agree. Echidnae 23:59, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

7. Keep an article about more than one person can still be vanity Philip 00:06, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)


8. Keep vanity nn. Xtra 00:30, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)


1. Delete and laugh at them! Let it stay. It's not patent nonsense because the group and people actually do exist, and it doesn't violate the terms of service. Censoring it because you don't personally think the users are notable goes against the spirit of the Wikipedia. 5:22, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

2. Kept: Humorous. 5:22, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

Those two votes both by the article author. Andrewa 23:43, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

3. Delete and laugh at them!. Let it stay. Yes; they exist. http://www.dailyjolt.com/forum/read.html?id=218539 This forum, because it appeals to college students, experiences an ever-changing group of users. Despite this, those named to the Fucking Bitch Club are regulars and questions will inevitably arise regarding this now-endearing moniker "Fucking Bitch." An explanation available to internet users is appropriate.

This vote by an anon with no other contributions, perhaps another forum member. Andrewa 23:47, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Just because something exists doesn't mean it needs an encyclopedia article. RickK 23:24, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)

4. Delete and laugh at them! . Problem does not require deletion. Such a minor branch of a subject that it doesn't deserve an article. Merge the useful content into a more comprehensive article and redirect. There is already a Wikipedia entry for the Daily Jolt. -- 00:18, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Fucking_Bitch_Club&oldid=9298800"