Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Owl Society


 * 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. Luna Santin 20:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Owl Society


Secret society that's very secret, so much so that almost nothing is known about them. Not verifiable. Note that the source mentioned in the article (which is a dead link) is from the 'Opinion' section of the campus paper, the Daily Pennsylvanian, and its writer outright states "everything [he knows] about the Owls is utterly circumstantial and unproven." Not a reliable source. Seems to be a magnet for nonsense and probable WP:COI. Shimeru 21:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete if this society is so secret why does it have an article. After all it wouldn't be secret anymore. Tarret 22:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - I found a source for it, but if I showed you, I'd have to kill you... ;) Spawn Man 02:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. No reliable sources, no assertion of importance, and the article makes claims about living people that involve unethical or illegal activities with no supporting evidence.  Serpent&#39;s Choice 04:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Of course we don't know a lot about it, it's a secret. How do we know deleting this article isn't what the Owl People want? 204.193.129.160 11:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete When an article talks about felony complaints, you'd expect to see bona fide citations of newspaper articles, and those articles should name individuals. I found that only one of the links worked, and it had nothing about the Owls. I vote for deletion, but would accept re-creation with reliable sources. How do we know that any of this is true? EdJohnston 20:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
 * By that logic, how do we know it's not true? The Owl Society most likely wants to keep their existence unknown, which is why sources are so hard to find. By deleting this article you're playing right into their hands. 204.193.129.160 12:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Too bad. This is an encyclopedia.  We don't keep articles that "might be" true if they're unverifiable. Shimeru 19:30, 29 November 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.