Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Banana Roulette


 * 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 Delete. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-26 09:31Z 

Banana Roulette

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Complete unsourced nonsense The article was speedily deleted once and then recreated (with the db tag and the "hang on" attached!) with a unsourced claim of significance. janejellyroll 11:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete - WP:SNOWBALL candidate if I ever saw it. The Kinslayer 11:02, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete Nonsense or vanity page or non-notable game or original research or Wikipedia is not for silly games involving fruit made up in school one day Jules1975 11:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Keep keep keep! I have been playing banana roulette for several years and believe that it is a completely valid subject for reference. Just because no books have been written about it does not mean that it is not a part of our proud british heritage! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.130.87.58 (talk • contribs)
 * I strongly disagree with the pretentious and wholly unjustified suggestion that this page requires deletion. Why is it that Banana Roulette can be frowned upon by the upper classes but that 'Chess' nonsense gets a free pass, hey? - BB4L — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.104.235.27 (talk • contribs)
 * Simple. Chess was not made up in school in one day.--UsaSatsui 20:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Chess nonsense as you call it has been the subject of multiple books and is proven to be played worldwide by millions of people. It exists, no such evidence exists for Banana Roulette. - Mgm|(talk) 09:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - unsourced, unverified, fails WP:NFT. However, it shouldn't technically be speedy deleted; it's not nonsense per se (hence not G1); it asserts notability without proving it (hence not A7) and it doesn't meet any other part of CSD. So it has to go through the full AfD; speedying it would be a violation of policy. Walton monarchist89 11:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Change vote to a simple Delete having read comments of Walton monarchist89 Jules1975 12:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per non notable game -- lucasbfr talk 13:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * delete per WP:NOT Cornell Rockey 13:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 *  Keep . Didn't you see the piece about the Great Banana Roulette Dispute on CNN last night? --UsaSatsui 20:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, maybe I'm too sarcastic this morning. Really, Delete. --UsaSatsui 20:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I can't turn up any evidence this actually exists which is the most important part of any article. - Mgm|(talk) 09:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually that's exactly what it means. The Kinslayer 14:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

What does Acutally mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.104.235.27 (talk • contribs)
 * It's like Banana Roulette, fictional bullshit. The Kinslayer 14:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete and nominate for WP:BJAODN. Suriel1981 13:39, 24 February 2007 (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.