Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fosh (game)


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 18:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Fosh (game)


there are no references to this game outside of Wikpedia. Either it does not exist, or it does so within a vanishingly small sphere Princess Tiswas 15:51, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 18:34, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that I have not come onto this website to deliberately create a 'hoax' or cause any sort of trouble. I am simlpy creating an entry about a game which is, in fact, very popular among school children. I have just viewed the list of entries which concern playground games and I must say that there are many of them which I have never heard of. 'Relatively new' is not an inside joke; it refers to the fact that compared to other games (such as football or bulldog) it is fairly young. If people DO have a serious problem with this entry and require more proof of the game's existence, i am more than willing to discuss. Comments like 'probable bullshit' and 'dumb' appear to me to be very immature and show an incredible arrogance. Let's remember, just because you haven't heard of it before, it does not mean that it doesn't exist. --Soupy Dan — Soupy Dan (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete - there are no sources and the content is not verifiable (WP:RS, WP:V). In addition, there are warning signs in the text such as "relatively new" that suggest it's just an inside joke. Crystallina 22:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete probable bullshit. Rever e ndG 23:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * DeleteSeconded. BS! Dfrg.m s c 1 . 2 . 3 23:13, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete dumb. Danny Lilithborne 01:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - WP:HOAX or something the author made up and plays with friends, and hence utterly NN. Pete Fenelon 02:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Non=notable if it does exist, which it may not. Most importantly, the lack of any sources is damning.  --The Way 07:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't buy the notability of the game. Montco 07:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I am incredibly suprised that anyone doesn't know Fosh. I was messing around on Wikipedia, avoiding homework, then I thought I'd look to see the oficail rules for Fosh as our Foshers gang had had a dispute earlier that day about a misjudged Mogmog. Now I find that people are disputing the exsistance! Shocking. I really didn’t think anyone could avoid it. It has dominated my life on the playground for a long as I can remember. I think I have photographs of the Fosh gang playing, would it help if I posted them? - Kitten Kid — Kitten Kid the Artist (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment Kitten Kid, you do seem sincere and I am guessing this game may actually exist, however you don't seem to understand why this has been nominated for deletion. The fact that something exists does not necessarily mean it deserves an article on the Wikipedia.  In order for a game of this sort to get an article, you must provide third party sources about the game meaning that you need to find either books, newspaper articles, or other such types of things that discuss the game and help to show that not only does the game exist, but that it is also well known to a sizable community.  --The Way 07:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I understand that third party sources are vital to the way wikipedia is run, but it would be difficult to find newspaper articles or suchlike for any playground game. I know that we play fosh at our school; it would be interesting to see how far across the U.K it has spread. Soupy Dan, do you know what the record number of munties is? In the Leicester area, it is generally the opinion that Keyham Lodge school holds the local record with 43. Where do you play fosh? --User:D_Gray — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.64.164.55 (talk • contribs) — 84.64.164.55 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

I am amazed that some people are disputing the existance of Fosh as a widely played game amongst children (and sometimes just the young at heart) in playgrounds today. I do not know to what extent 'relatively new' implies, but I know that Fosh has been a prominant passtime in my family since I was a very small child. Admittedly, we probably play slightly different rules to the hardcore Fosh players out there, but it seems to work in our small garden. Not only this, however - but at our last family reunion we introduced the game to our entire family, from the youngest toddlers to the elderly grandparents. I defy anyone to not like Fosh. - Blondy Boy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.69.97.111 (talk • contribs) — 84.69.97.111 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

I must say Fosh is one of the most excitable games I have ever played. Being a skilful Fosher myself, I find it hard to comprehend how some people just havnt heard of such a popular sport. It has coem to my attention that this intricate and demanding sport has originated in a small place called Milton Keynes and am not suprised how far it has spread. I live in Inverness and just taking a morning stroll to the local shops past the park it is amazing just how many youths of today are seen enjoying a casual game of Fosh or even the local teams who take things to the next level completely. I would recommend this sport to anyone as it not only is a fantastic form of excercise, but also stimulates the brain and gives the player endless hours of the same sort of adrelenine excitement as you would imagine a skydive to do. So if you wish to be in with the youth of today, simply play the remarkable game that is Fosh... --Mana Superbean 00:25, 29 November 2006 (UTC) — Mana Superbean (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment Initially, I was leaning towards believing that this game was real, though still likely unsuitable for Wikipedia due to a total lack of notability. Now, after the above comments that appear to be suspiciously like sockpuppetry, I am guessing this is a hoax.  It really, really seems similar to a number of other 'games' or 'sports' which were hoaxes, such as footbasket, that went up on AfD a couple of weeks ago... --The Way 06:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment The anon IP's all seem to be from London, three of them from the same ISP. Also, see Max cards, The Game of OBOT, Handy Slappy, and Garden Hopping. Looks like the real game here is "Fun with Wikipedia" ;-) Someone buy these kids a copy of World of Warcraft for Christmas to keep 'em busy, puh-leeeeze... Tubezone 07:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * whether or not it is suitable for wikipedia is, i guess, up to whoever runs the site, but i can tell you it is not a hoax. it IS a real game that many people play, and it's great fun. i know loads of people who have played variations of fosh. i appreciate that sources are needed, but as soupy dan said, it is difficult to find newspaper articles and suchlike about playground games. how often do you see newspaper articles etc for games that are not played in leagues, like bulldog, or polo? (the running back and forward polo, not the one that is played in leagues. heh. 84.71.212.249 20:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)Little My

yep, i know it's strange but it is a real game, it's even got a site www.freewebs.com/foshers, it has been around for a few years and i've played it, it is certainly NOT a hoax (greatest gnome in the world) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.46.120 (talk • contribs)


 * Delete An obvious experiment with wikiality. Time to shut it down. --Arvedui 04:02, 30 November 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.