Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dwile flonking


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) — ΛΧΣ  21  02:18, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Dwile flonking

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject is a hoax. Most external references are broken, the others admit it may be a hoax, and most of the article's content is copied verbatim from the main non-broken reference. Brazzy (talk) 14:49, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 14:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 14:58, 30 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - Dwile flonking is absolutely not a hoax. See this article in The Telegraph for verification. Northamerica1000(talk) 14:59, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It is possibly an *old* hoax, but all the sources point to it being made made up in 1966 at the earliest and actually performed mostly as a joke. Brazzy (talk) 15:09, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - Probably being a hoax is fine if the article states that people think it's a hoax. That's implied at current, and could be expanded to become explicit (though I won't do it myself). Also looks to me like it barely squeaks past WP:GNG. Ansh666 17:40, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Whether put-on or not in its origins, it's now evidently known and covered in sources from a 1967Hartford Courant to a 2011 Toronto Star .  GBooks has numerous results, including a rather sober entry in the Encyclopedia Of Traditional British Rural Sports as well as more jovial ones such as  etc., etc., etc.  --Arxiloxos (talk) 19:32, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes Wikipedia's threshold of notability having received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources:, , , , , (shorter article). Northamerica1000(talk) 04:12, 31 July 2013 (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.