Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/21 Society


 * 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 no consensus.  howch e  ng   {chat} 00:45, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

21 Society
Secret societies are, by their very nature, unverifiable. This one doesn't even seem particularly notable even if it weren't secret. User:Zoe|(talk) 05:01, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless verified. Movementarian 05:57, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Article has been verified and external links to references added. - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 08:08, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup per AdelaMae's research. Movementarian 10:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete, unverifiable. -- Megamix? 07:39, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Actually, many secret societies are verifiable. This one happens to be among them, given that its creation was announced in the UVA student newspaper.  It is only six years old, but that does mean that it has demonstrated an ability to survive after its founding members have graduated.  They have offered a scholarship and made donations to various UVA activities.  Their traditional "gift" of 21 bottles of beer is controversial.  People list 21 Society recognition on their CVs. The bottom line is, WP:ISNOT paper, and as that page says, "This means that there is no practical limit to the number of topics we can cover other than verifiability and the other points presented on this page."  This is verifiable and not deletable for any of the other reasons listed on that page.  To people, like myself, who are fascinated by secret societies, it is interesting.  To people interested in US college/university culture or in UVA history, it is interesting.  There's no reason to delete this. - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 08:01, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't know. Are student newspapers considered reliable sources on Wikipedia? -- Megamix? 08:43, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The society's existence and nature are verifiable without reference to the student newspaper. Note these links from above:    - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 08:56, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete Verifiable or not, this is still NN. &mdash;gorgan_almighty 14:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. NN. Per nom. Agnte 14:40, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. University student organizations are rarely encyclopedic.  Secret society status does not change that standard.  Compare this to a notable student organization, the Columbia University Marching Band.  The latter group received national press coverage and appeared on David Letterman. Durova 16:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Additional Comment - It is verifiable and NPOV, which seems to be enough for Jimbo. It is certainly not a vanity article (I have never been to Virginia and had never heard of this society before the AFD vote).  It is not original research, as everything in the article is based on easily accessible sources.  Somebody please explain to me how on earth it's going to hurt anyone to include this article in Wikipedia.  Obviously, somebody who's not the creator of the article and is not personally related to its topic (me) finds it interesting.  Why delete it? - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 20:59, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * There's a precedent on AfD: a mention under the parent university is usually sufficient for a student organization. Student groups and local scholarships come and go.  The relevant university maintains up to date information.  So Wikipedia readers are better served by reference to the university. Durova 23:41, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Then shouldn't the vote be to merge to University of Virginia? - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 23:55, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I doubt this little student group merits equal attention with the architectural legacy of Thomas Jefferson. Mention doesn't mean merge. Durova 01:34, 21 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. As a member of the secret Delete Crap Like That society, I must insist. Flyboy Will 21:22, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep – agree with Momentarian and AdelaMae. Questionably interesting, but factual and verifiable. Certainly not "crap" if they've offered a scholarship. I'm sure that many would find it interesting even if I don't, just like many of the articles on Wikipedia. Who are we to say it is not notable if it is unbiased, factual, and someone has taken the time to painstakenly verify it? Uris 22:47, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep As a member of the |A Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians I suppose I would though....oh and As Per Uris too. Jcuk
 * Keep - ,remove personal attack - User:Zoe|(talk) 00:58, 26 December 2005 (UTC)>. Piecraft 17:03, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - Who cares if it's NN??? The point of Wikimedia is to collaboratively collect the "sum of all human knowledge". This article can be a resource for somebody that wants to know more about the 21 Society. It should be kept. --¿ WhyBeNormal ? 06:16, 24 December 2005 (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.