Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neck (children's 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 Speedy deleted A11 (not by me). Peridon (talk) 18:05, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Neck (children's game)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Something made up one day. It is just a reiteration of an Urban Dictionary page. Non-notable game. Justeditingtoday (talk) 02:38, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

==Neck (children's game)

There are lots of pages about games (see List of traditional children's games) If you don't like games, that doesn't mean no-one likes them, either.

P.S.: You probably don't want to popularize the idea lest it happens to you. If you are a man, wouldn't you easily endure a slap by a 10-year old. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BloodyKnuckles1 (talk • contribs) 02:49, 21 November 2016 (UTC)


 * The fact that other stuff exists doesn't mean that this is notable and worthy of inclusion. Justeditingtoday (talk) 02:51, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

The article is notable:


 * The 'Significant Coverage' adresses necks directly and in detail (it even uses variables to explain necks) People do it in front of (and to) me. The original research thing can be easily proven by a scientist (by anyone that can talk to a kid, pretty much).


 * The website I used is reliable because the page was written by people who neck others and get necked by others. My sister does it with her friends at school, and she taught me to neck, so that's both a reliable source (the way it would be more reliable to learn about the 19th century from those who lived then than from those who live now) and a secondary source.


 * Try to find anything on that page that is independent of the subject.


 * The significant coverage creates an assumption that necks should be included.

P.S.: You are doing all of this just because you don't want to popularize necks.

BloodyKnuckles1 (talk) 03:43, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * "P.S.: You are doing all of this just because you don't want to popularize necks. " WP:NOTSOAPBOX.

Delete. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 04:01, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Delete- Non-notable nonsense created by a random editor at Urban Dictionary. Can't see any reason why not to delete this page.Your welcome &#124; Democratics Talk 05:27, 21 November 2016 (UTC) Delete as soon as possible utter nonsense Domdeparis (talk) 13:39, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I searched for coverage in reliable sources and found nothing. Urban Dictionary consists of user submitted content and is therefore not a reliable source. An editor's sister is not a reliable source, and anyone making such a claim does not understand what a reliable source actually is. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  05:55, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Delete The author and his sister are not reliable independent sources as they have not been published in places that fit with WP:RS. "You are doing all of this just because you don't want to popularize necks" - I think you will find that necks are quite popular already. Even I have one, and to judge from his username, quite possibly one of our other admins has two. But Wikipedia is not here to popularise things, so I think that 'advertising and/or promotion' could be added to the reasons for deletion even if this is proven to be notable (which I doubt). Peridon (talk) 19:07, 21 November 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.