Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hangmen Motorcycle Club


 * 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 redirect to List of outlaw motorcycle clubs. Opinion is all over the map. I'm tempted to say merge would be a reasonable compromise, but looking at List of outlaw motorcycle clubs, it looks like the amount of material which would be reasonable to merge is already there, so calling this a redirect.

I'm more or less discounting the comment from WP:SPA, whose user name leads me to suspect a close connection with the subject.

Of course, the current text of this article will still be accessible through the history, so there's nothing to keep anybody from digging deeper. That's a content issue, and AfD shouldn't be dictating content. -- RoySmith (talk) 09:53, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Hangmen Motorcycle Club

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Don't see GNG here, much less the required and more restrictive ORG. Normally when you see a book reference you figure pretty much all good. Only problem is when you put the word "hangmen" in the handy little search box on the google book page referenced, you get no hits. A Google news search yielded nothing either. John from Idegon (talk) 06:38, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete This outlaw motorcycle club exists but seems always to have been pretty small and it seemingly peaked decades ago. The bigger clubs are highly notable but my searches yielded only passing mentions of this club. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  07:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep I just added a cite to Bill Hayes' One Percenter Encyclopedia which is used as a legit cite for WP article on many outlaw motorcycle clubs. There's a chapter on this particular club in the One Percenter Encyclopedia. It's also included in Hell on Wheels by same author. As John from Idegon said, a good book reference usually means the article is on solid footing. We have additional passing references or better here in a book published by Springer, here in one by Simon & Schuster. This took just a few minutes of research, there's surely more in a deeper search at HighBeam and the like. - Brianhe (talk) 09:05, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 09:55, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 09:55, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 09:55, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - per edits from user Brianhe.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:50, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment – If not independently notable, an option is to merge to List of outlaw motorcycle clubs, rather than deleting content that could be used to improve that article. See also WP:PRESERVE. North America1000 13:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:42, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete at best as there's nothing suggesting the necessary convincing improvements and I myself only a found a few links. Draft the contents if necessary, SwisterTwister   talk  22:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I suppose I can consider the merge but I can also certainly say this is not solidly notable yet. SwisterTwister   talk  06:28, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep - this club has been in existence since 1960, there are several newer clubs, and far less relevant motorcycle clubs that should be considered for deletion before this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keeper of The Rope (talk • contribs) 22:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * "Relevance" defined how? Relevance isn't an inclusion criteria. Coverage in independent reliable sources is required per WP:CORP. ~Amatulić (talk) 06:04, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of outlaw motorcycle clubs. Not enough in-depth coverage for a standalone article.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:18, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge to List of outlaw motorcycle clubs, which will improve the merge target article, as per WP:PRESERVE. North America1000 06:22, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 08:39, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect. Do not merge. The target article (List of outlaw motorcycle clubs)is a table of motorcycle clubs and already has information about this one, more so than most others. Merging anymore would violate WP:UNDUE. This article lacks the secondary source coverage to stand on its own, but as it has information about it in another article a redirect is best. AIR corn (talk) 02:35, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note - As nominator, redirect makes sense in this situation to me also. However, I'm in complete agreement with that merger is not needed per his arguements. John from Idegon (talk) 05:06, 8 May 2016 (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.