User:Balloonman/CSD Survey/3.4

Original Article
The house of Cedars is a block in Broadgate Park in self catered accomadation at Nottingham University. Cedars is situated in the Upper Court region of Broadgate park, also known as 'The Ghetto'. The building includes 6 flats, each consisting of 5 bedrooms, 1 kitchen and 1 bathroom. However, this also includes one larger room. Traditionally, the block includeds 3 male flats and 3 female flats. The 2007-2008 generation of Cedars with live long in the memory, this year saw the block dubbed 'Seedy Seedy Cedars' by locals due to its notable promiscuous activities. The incest list stetches far and wide and with relationships continuing up to today shows the deep rooted nature within these individuals. Flat 23 also known as 'The Others' due to their severe lack of social skills and failed attempts at integration. This lacklustre approach was primarily due to a symptom also known as the 'second year slump' however, it was commonly assumed that during the 1 year tenure the Flat 23 residents failed miserably in what should have been an uplifting experiance. However, then came sunlight, then came thunder, then came...Rob. Rob rejuvinated the house to such a degree whereby names were finally put to faces among the Cedars faithful. FLAT 23 (The Others) -Room 5:Zen...no nickname, just some guy. -Room 4:'Standard White Guy', also known as Russell. -Room 3:Ola, we believe this is his real name, according to Rob's sources. -Room 2:'Bandanna Man', also known as Charlie. -Room 1:Rob Dolan FLAT 24 (The Downies) -Room 5:Josh Fleming also known as jflem or flem. -Room 4:Dan Maney, also known as 'Dan the Man' in the early stages of his tenure in the building. -Room 3:Chris Gibbs, can be reffered to either as Chris, or bigboy gibbs. -Room 2:Matthew Butcher...some ginger guy found lurking, and generally gadding about.

Nomination Criteria
G1

Patent nonsense. Pages consisting purely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history. This does not include poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, vandalism, fictional material, material not in English, poorly translated material, implausible theories, or hoaxes; some of these, however, may be deleted as vandalism in blatant cases.

WP:Nonsense Wikipedia writers and editors contribute a lot of brilliant prose, but occasionally some patent nonsense. This falls into two categories:

1. Total nonsense, i.e., text or random characters that have no assignable meaning at all. This includes sequences such as "sdfgdsfkgdshgdkhgdsklhsklgroflmaolololol;;;'dsfgdfg", in which keys of the keyboard have been pressed with no regard for what is typed.

2. Content that, while apparently meaningful after a fashion, is so completely and irredeemably confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it whatsoever.

Survey Comments

 * I think there are also some borderline BLP problems here, but not G1
 * G1 is blatantly incorrect, but probably deletable through PROD or AFD due to notability concerns.
 * What are the odds...I used to live opposite Broadgate Park in my first year at Nottingham!
 * I'd almost say it's worth oversighting, but if deletion gets it out of the eyes of the public...
 * Technically a prod, but if I were in a bad mood I'd delete it A7
 * but rm info about residents
 * Might just about sneak into G2 or G3 I suppose (possibly even A1). Whatever, kill with fire
 * G11 promotional, or G7 group.
 * Merge the first paragraph with another article and speedy redirect.
 * Has meaningful content. Delete as attack page.
 * I'd edit out all but the first paragraph, then search to see if this needs expansion or prod.
 * edit to remove all but first paragraph and tag for notability

Balloonman's analysis
I don't get the sense that this is an attack page, but rather a vanity piece written by somebody who lives there. PRODing it is probably the correct option, but I would have no objections to deleting it A7 as an argument could be made that it is about community that compromises the occupants of the building. That, however, might be a stretch as it could also be argued that it is about the building itself, which is not CSD'able.

There are no CSD criteria where this article fits cleanly, A7 IMO comes the closest and I would probably delete it per A7. This is the one that comes the closest to IAR in my opinion. It is clearly not encyclopedic, but doesn't really fit any of the criteria. A7 works, but you have to stretch it to do so.