Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drink while you think (relist nomination)


 * 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 Keep. --Luigi30 (&Tau;&alpha;&lambda;&kappa; &tau;&omicron; m&epsilon;) 22:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Drink while you think
One of the unsourced, and at this time externally unverifiable drinking game articles listed in a mass deletion earlier today (Articles for deletion/Circle of Death (drinking game)) Per the closing statement of this aborted mass-nomination, this is an individual relist of the article. Please consider the article on its own merits, and not on the fact that many articles of this type have been nominated today -- Saberwyn 10:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - have added a huge list of scholarly sources, drawn from Google.Vizjim 11:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC) - Also, adding a request for verifiable sources to this article page would have been a good way to start this process. What we have here is an abuse of the deletion process, designed to overwhelm opposition by simply giving opponents of your view all the work to do, all at once.Vizjim 11:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep per BBC coverage as well as the 250 drinking game books listed at Amazon... --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 13:41, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete because WP:NOT a collection of rules and instructions. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:21, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. I presume that in referring to WP:NOT you are specifically talking about "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information", point 8?  This says, I quote - Instruction manuals - while Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places, and things, Wikipedia articles should not include instruction - advice (legal, medical, or otherwise), suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, video game guides, and recipes.  An article on this drinking game has the obvious potential to contain a) history and evolution of the game, b) its cultural significance, c) appearances in books, on TV shows, in films etc, and thus is more than simply a collection of rules (it doesn't matter if these things are not there or haven't been completed: the fact is, they could be inserted).  However, the rules need to be included as otherwise it would be impossible to give a clear idea of the game - and I presume you are not arguing that the entries for Chess and Soccer should be deleted? Vizjim 11:15, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per BBC coverage; encyclopedias have always included rules for notable games, and Wikipedia is WP:NOT limited by the limitations of paper encyclopedias.--Prosfilaes 04:33, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. A classic.  Do we have a Botticelli on the headie page? (AKA Rizla game) -- GWO


 * weak delete Due to the point about this being an instruction manual. It seems to belong either in Wiktionary or perhaps as a two-sentence entry in "Drinking Games".Apollo 10:42, 9 May 2006 (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.