Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Order of the Bull's Blood


 * 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 Rutgers University student organizations. I copied the content to the talk page of Rutgers student orgs yandman  08:23, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Order of the Bull&
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

No proof that this exists at all. The sources given do not prove anything. either way (talk) 22:38, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge Into Rutgers University. Some media coverage alleging its existence can be found:, and  (you need to pay for the third one). Pastor Theo (talk) 23:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The first article is just based on an interview with one alleged member of the group. It does not prove anything about it other than one guy says it exists and it does things like pranks.  The second article uses Wikipedia as a source, so that proves nothing.  Any clue what's in the 3rd article?  either way (talk) 23:23, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 13:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I would oppose deletion. Isn’t it in the nature of secret societies for people to deny they exist? Doesn’t it play into that to delete the page? There is already a discussion on this subject on the talkpage from 2 years ago and the conclusion there is there are credible sources for its existence. If there is a doubt surely the answer is to write a “controversy” section” showing both sides of the debate, without drawing a conclusion. The purpose of an encyclopaedia is to provide easily accessible information: Having come across the term, I was interested to know what it was; now there’s the suggestion it’s all a hoax, I’m interested in that, too, and I’m sure I’m not the only one. So I think it should stay. Moonraker12 (talk) 13:17, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 02:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Redirect/merge. I guess this could be a search term, so let's not delete it entirely. The one full paragraph could be merged into the Rutgers article. As for the previous editor's references to this being interesting, well, that's neither here nor there. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to provide verifiable information--there's nothing verifiable here, since there are no reliable sources. Of course a campus paper is going to run such a story; that Cap and Skull thing, that's nothing; the NY Press story seems to have disappeared. Pastor Theo's other sources (the first one was already in the article) don't do much--the NY Times article gives only passing mention, and the article from the Washington Post (I have full access) doesn't mention this joint at all. Drmies (talk) 03:45, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * What are you suggesting we merge? The information in there is unverifiable and the sources don't help at all.  either way (talk) 03:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, this: "In the Spring of each year, twelve members of the junior class are chosen, or "tapped," by the outgoing members from the senior class of the Order and are tied to a series of continuing pranks at Rutgers and at historic rival Princeton University, including allegedly being involved in the 1875 theft of a cannon at Princeton—an event (and the ensuing debate between the two university presidents) reported in nationwide newspapers—and an unsuccessful repeat attempt in 1946.[citation needed]." Or parts of it. A bunch of this "info" is already here, Rutgers_University_student_organizations. It won't be much more unverified (not the same as unverifiable, I acknowledge) as some of the other organizations. Now, don't get me wrong--by saying "keep some of the information" I am not suggesting that the "organization" is notable, only that the belief by some (as irrational, silly, or whatever it may be) that the organization exists is notable. A conspiracy theory, sure, one verified by the sources in the article: they verify at least the belief that this joint exists. Sheesh, I can't believe I'm breaking a lance for a secret society, they can all, allegedly, bleep my bleep. But here it is, and there was one where I went to school, and those nuts make it notable by believing, or pretending to believe, or wanting to believe, that these things exist. Drmies (talk) 04:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * To put in another ha'pennyworth; I think the page is worth having, for the reasons I gave, but adding it to the Rutgers article could be giving it undue weight. The most notable thing about it may be the possibility of its existence; otherwise it sounds pretty picayune (not to mention unpleasant. And illegal; isn't "Tapping" a euphemism for harassment?) Moonraker12 (talk) 18:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The possibility of its existence is all that is proven, IMO, by the sources provided (and I failed to find any more), but not to the extent required by WP:N. Adding it to the Rutgers article (we're really talking about a sentence or two) lends less weight than this article dedicated to the organization (not to the possibility of its existence). So I don't see it that way. As for tapping, often that really means that, tapping. In the basements of the Old Row Greek houses at various campuses in the South, it's a tap on the shoulder, from behind, so you don't see who tapped you, to indicate you are chosen for some mission or other--slash a tire, become SGA president, etc. Mind you, I'm speaking completely hypothetically and allegedly, of course. See Theta Nu Epsilon, allegedly. If that article exists. Shhh. Drmies (talk) 04:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough; I was seeing a separate page as being in the nature of a footnote, somewhere away from the main text to go to if you are interested; while even a couple of sentences in a 5 paragraph section on all the societies at Rutgers seems like a lot. But we can agree to differ on it.Moonraker12 (talk) 12:53, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

So where does this go from here? We’ve got 4 contributors giving 3 different options so far; not a recipe for consensus, really...Moonraker12 (talk) 12:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Rutgers University student organizations as a possible search term. The sources in this article are dire, and unsuitable for use due to bias, unavailabilty (that's not strictly a factor, but it doesn't help) and unreliability. However, if this society does exist, which is seems it does at least, then it could be a reasonable redirect to the main article on student organisations at this university. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 07:50, 10 February 2009 (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.