Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Delta Tau Delta


 * 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 speedy keep, as no valid reason for deletion was given (the article is not alleged to be unencyclopedic in any way, per WP:NOT), and the nomination was one of the first acts taken by a newly-established account. Wikipedia is NPOV and therefore does not censor articles at the behest of their subject. -- BD2412 talk 08:04, 2005 Jun 24 (UTC)

Delta_Tau_Delta
This article is repeatedly used to disseminate secret ritual information of the Delta Tau Delta Fraternity and this is a clear violation of the national fraternity's policies towards the protections of such information. If this continues the abuse will be reported to the national fraternity
 * Keep? I'm not sure what to make of this. The article is fine and certainly belongs here, but the complaint seems to be about an edit war going on between two anons as to whether the organization's "secret word" should be posted. No need to list it here, as anyone can see it in the edit history. Having once pledged a fraternity myself, I appreciate the importance of secret words and such to these organizations. Having since grown up, I appreciate the utter silliness of the whole thing. If the secret word is, in fact, a correct piece of information, it hardly seems to be our place to prevent it from being included in an article on the organization. Come to think of it, the article is kind of a puff piece, and leaves out stuff like this, and this. -- BD2412 talk 05:54, 2005 Jun 24 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep on ground of invalid nomination. Nomination unsigned, and no valid Wikipedia reason for deletion given. Xoloz 05:59, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep, warn user, and "report to the national fraternity." What are they going to do, hold a kegger on our front lawn? -- Essjay ·  Talk 07:20, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep - Nomination does not establish criteria for deletion. --FCYTravis 07:33, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * In light of the above votes, the lack of any criteria for deletion in the nomination, and the fact that the nominator was from a brand-spanking new account whose second edit ever was to start this vfd, I'm calling this a walk in the park and removing the vfd notice. -- BD2412 talk 08:00, 2005 Jun 24 (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.