Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mothers Against Swearing Association


 * 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, although hoaxes are not speediable under current policy. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:27, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Mothers Against Swearing Association
Non-notable... Two google hits. (Can it be speedied? Haven't been around these parts for a while.) Mrtea (talk) 06:18, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete "sponsorships by Volvo and Coca-Cola" is a tenuous claim of notability, but this fails WP:WEB and WP:V. -- Scientizzle 06:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: I moved this page to its current title from a non-standard one earlier today, so if it gets deleted, don't forget to also remove MASA (The Mother's Against Swearing Association) and its talk page. -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 06:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I've requested the redirect be speedied as it is extremely unlikely. 68.39.174.238 16:43, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete as hoax. I'm pretty sure this made the blog rounds last year and got laughed at. --Dhartung | Talk 07:54, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:HOAX (or at least WP:V). --Core des at talk. o.o;; 08:31, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete, if hoaxes can be speedied. I'm pretty damn sure it's a hoax: the URL for the website is "masavolvo", which makes me think it's South African: "ma se ..." (pronounced "mah sa", meaning "your mother's...") is a common preface to an insult here, and I can only assume "volvo" refers to vulva.  Which means someone is no doubt being funny (and I love the humour), but it is not really debatable whether it should be in an encyclopaedia as a real organisation or not.  Get rid of it.  If it becomes a renowned and appreciated hoax, maybe it can come back in an article about hoaxes. Byrgenwulf 10:40, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * DO NOT DELETE I do not feel that your evidence to support a deletion of this page is valid, therefore, a deletion would conflict with the rules and guidelines of the Guide to deletion. I suggest that you further review your accusations before making such rash decisions.  This "masavolvo" to which you refer can simply be explained by the fact that it is MASA and Volvo.  Two separate entities.  MASA refers to the name of the organization while Volvo refers to the claimed sponsor.  Byrgenwulf, you seem to be using your own opinion as opposed to true evidence to have this page considered for deletion.  I can also assure you, Dhartung, that this page has never been entered into any blogs as a discussion prior to this.  Also, the information on this article has much to do with the claims and stories from the website.  It is sourced, and therefore none of you have any real grounds to propose deletion to this page.  Brendand 8:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Nice try. It's "sourced" from a Geocities webpage.  Which mentions nothing about Volvo (I clicked on all the links, listened to the sing-a-long, and had a good laugh).  Maybe masavolvo is over-interpretation on my part (if not, I do find it funny), but what does this lot need money for?  What projects have they undertaken?  Why, if Volvo is giving them money, can't they even afford a couple of bucks a month for proper webhosting.  I love the joke, I really do, but a free webhosting page which reads like a joke is not a verifiable source.  Anyway, guidelines to deletion for vanity require third party sources; this page mentions none. Byrgenwulf 13:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, how can you be so sure no-one has ever mentioned it on a blog? How many blogs are there out there? Do you read all of them? Byrgenwulf 13:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Discussion continued on talk.


 * Delete --WP:BJAODN. If you don't believe this is a bad joke check out here. --ScienceApologist 13:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I have heard this song. I do not see how it proves anything.  It is a song which appeals to a younger generation.  Makes sense?  Does to me.  Besides, that's beyond the point as we should be speaking of the Wikipedia article.  Not a promotional song. Brendand 10:01, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:V, the website seems to have disappeared. Shame really, I was curious about the song. -MrFizyx 14:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * DO NOT DELETE The website has not been deleted, the bandwith has been exceeded for the hour. Brendand 10:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, I did get to hear some of the MASA "recordings". Very funny, but your joke doesn't belong in this encyclopedia, sorry. -MrFizyx 14:38, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete as per Scientizzle's comments. Multiple links to one geocities site do not qualify under reliable source guidelines. If sources can be cited demonstrating multiple, non-trivial, independent media coverage of this group, that'd be different. Subject is non-notable. Scorpiondollprincess 14:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Two Google hits, both of which point back to the Wikipedia article? Delete as hoax, vanity, etc.  Anville 15:13, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * DO NOT DELETE Scorpiondollprincess, it cannot be assumed that the site is not a reliable source based solely on assumption. That has to do with the author.  What is this about media coverage?  What you say is completely opinionated and should not be treated as a factor to the deletion of the page.  There are plenty of pages on Wikipedia with a link to a single page.  And as for these "google hits".  There is only one hit, and it does not even go anywhere.  So why should that even be considered?  I will answer that.  It shouldn't. Brendand 11:43, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Brendand, I shall preface this by saying that field theory in mathematics is not an area in which I am an expert. However, is there a reason you changed "the central concept" to "the hellocentral concept" ?  Is "hellocentral" a particular term in this field of enquiry, that I don't know about? I hope you don't mind, but I took the liberty of changing it back to normal English.  Byrgenwulf 15:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment Brendand, please read "Please do not take it personally". What this article needs is multiple, independent sources. The group's own homepage cited three times is neither independent nor multiple. WP:RS contains guidelines on sources. Self-published sources (online and paper) contains guidelines on the reliability of someone talking about him/herself. I suggest independent sources be provided: has anyone written a newspaper or magazine article about this group? Have they won any awards? No one is trying to be unfair. But wikipedia does have guidelines on how to evaluate sources. Thanks. Scorpiondollprincess 16:46, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, obviously, per above. Dark Shikari 16:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * DO NOT DELETE Byrgenwulf, if you look at the history, my name does not appear.  I am not sure exactly what you are talking about because I followed your link and that was the first time I have ever seen that page.  This seems to be another hollow accusation...a common trend which seems to be going on today.  Brendand 12:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Brendand, you needn't preface every response with "do not delete" in bold. It achieves less than nothing.  No, the editing history doesn't show your username, because the edit came from the same I.P. address (192.139.71.69) as your last two comments here, as well as a few edits in "swearing" and "profanity" etc.  Being an I.P. address, it could be co-incidence, but I'm not so sure, myself.  Byrgenwulf 16:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

[ec]
 * Comment Brendand, please do not "vote" more than once. It's fairly obvious that you've used your user account and the IP address 192.139.71.69 to vandalize several pages now--your last edit to this page was done by 192.139.71.69 and signed with Brendand.  Quit playing dumb; don't create hoaxes; become a productive member of Wikipedia or leave, please. -- Scientizzle 16:13, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I have had quite enough accusations for one day. This is a business computer on a network so don't start feeding me crap about how it could ONLY be me.  Why don't you stop it with the unproductive accusations for a while, buddy.  Brendand
 * Speedy delete under WP:CSD. —Caesura(t) 17:46, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The idea of such an organisation sounds really nice, but unfortunately, for all the above reasons, delete. --Slgr @ ndson (page - messages - contribs) 18:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete when we can't even confirm its existence. Travislangley 21:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and others. I've heard that the presence of a "keep" recommendation means it can't be speedied? Paddles TC 15:21, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete for the obvious reasons. Can't believe it hasn't happened already. VoiceOfReason 17:12, 24 July 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.