Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meef (third 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 was delete. - Mailer Diablo 14:10, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Meef
This article was deleted twice before as a neologism, and this time, a Google search brings up no relevant hits whatsoever. The article should be deleted and protected. MSJapan 20:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Looks like pure nonsense to me at this point.  Wickethewok 20:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The article tells us outright, in no less than four separate places, that this secret society is too secret for Wikipedia. Delete. Uncle G 20:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

There are no relevant hits because it is a relativly young organization. The article was written for the first time today and no article has been deleted in the past covering similar content. This content was never removed or labled "neologism". What's the point in deleting it if the content is real. Keep in mind this wasn't written by some teenager..why don't you actually read the whole thing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pacomonkey (talk • contribs) 21:15, 6 October 2006 (UTC).
 * Comment: Well, then, by statement of the article author it's unverifiable and non-notable as per the WP:RS and WP:NN Wikipedia policies. MSJapan 18:21, 7 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom - NN, unverified (and unverifiable), weasel words, selfcontradicting... the list goes on. WegianWarrior 22:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * DeleteNeologism.Edison 21:20, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

It is verifiable. Go to Facebook.com and look up the global group "meef". It exists, is verifiable and deserves a place on wikipedia for anyone who would like to see it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pacomonkey (talk • contribs)
 * I would suggest that you read the notability guidelines here on Wikipedia, as well as learn how to sign comments. Frankly, your desire to write an article on Meef has gotten you ahead of how to follow WP guidelines.  Moreover, you assume that anyone can go and search Facebook, which they can't; they require a login to use the site.  If that wasn't bad enough, the entire article is anecdotal, which violates WP:RS. MSJapan 13:53, 9 October 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.