Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shot Off Posse


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 08:27, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Shot Off Posse

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable criminal organization. Google has not heard of this organization; neither has Google News Archive. This article may be a hoax. The 3 references are offline sources that may have been fabricated by the author. This article has previously been deleted three times under the name The Shot Off Posse and was created by, who was blocked indefinitely for repeatedly creating this article with violations of WP:BLP. The user who recreated this article, created an account the day after Blackjackjokerz was blocked, so TnMeth is a likely sock. Cunard (talk) 05:59, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I am a member of Tennessee Methamphetamine Task Force, the references are not fabricated. I have a VHS tape of the FOX13 story on this group as well as many local newspaper clipings. I understand these may no longer be online but I assure you these are not fabricated. Another refernce from local paper, The Collierville Herald, will be added.(TnMethTaskForce (talk) 06:27, 2 April 2009 (UTC)) Comment: while it is always true that a reference "may have been fabricated", is there any reason to believe that is more likely in this article than any other? Arkady Renkov (talk) 11:02, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Seems likely when the article has already been deleted three times and all the supporters are recently created spas. The first ref (The Collierville Herald) does not have onlines archives going back far enough but I would have thought that "shot off posse" would have been mentioned at least once since 2006 if they really are notable.  The second ref (Memphis Commercial Appeal) DOES have online archives for the period but completely fails to verify the claim.  I can't be bothered to waste my time with the rest of the refs.  We are being hoaxed and socked. Delete.  Sp in ni  ng  Spark  11:56, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree that the two users are the same, and I would have blocked the first account too, based on the history; however, the editor has been cooperative (but needs to change his username), and I would consider the previous account's interactions under the category of "learning the hard way." Based on the information provided, the organization is marginally notable at best, and that no more than within the Memphis area. Just because references are not available online does not mean that they are invalid or fabricated; that said, I find nothing in the Commercial Appeal archives under any of several search terms, and if there are only three stories over three years, it's not a notable organization.   Acroterion  (talk)  12:07, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete apparent hoax. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  13:38, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, as compelling as the SPA sock fabricators are. WP:DENY WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 20:10, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

User: Blackjackjokerz, is my oldest son. He tried to write this article but it was understandably removed. I took on the task myself, and did my best to follow the wiki guidelines, witch User: Acroterion helped me very much as I am a fan of wikipedia but a new editor. I hope to write a few more articles on meth-producing gangs in the Mid-South area. I have taged the article "underconstruction" and will improve it with time. I am bothered by the fact that I have been polite and cooperative to everybody here and my work is labled as a "Hoax", "Fabricated" and "Non-notable", witch in the Memphis area meth market this group is more than notable. Please inform me as to what I can do better, or what I have done wrong. Any help will be greatly appreciated, Thank You.(TnMethTaskForce (talk) 22:32, 2 April 2009 (UTC))
 * Delete The task force actually exists, but as this is a project with worldwide reach, the mention of a local group isn't that notable unless they have multiple mentions in multiple Tennessee media markets beyond WHBQ-TV in Memphis. As it is, there's only one mention of it at all in G-hits, and that's from some moron on MySpace who hasn't visited his profile in three years. Thus the notability of this group sounds at worst non-existant, and at best scattershot and disconnected.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 23:52, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Many more and most articles on this group were published by The Collierville Herald. I can reference these, but as far as I can tell references must be on Google.? The Collierville Herald has covered the news of Collierville and the surrounding area for 130 years. But these articles (to the best of MY knowledge) can not be found on Google.(TnMethTaskForce (talk) 01:32, 3 April 2009 (UTC)) — TnMethTaskForce (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

I have added more references from The Collierville Herald, I will also add references from WHBQ (Fox13)(TnMethTaskForce (talk) 01:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC))
 * Perhaps we haven't been clear. The issue is not with the number of sources, it is with the ability to verify their content on a page where several editors have already shown themselves willing and able to break the rules to create it. Considering the gang is ostensibly based in Memphis, they have very low notability.  Unless working urls are included, you're wasting your time.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 01:58, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

The Collierville Herald articles are obtainable at Collierville Public Library thus verifiable. How does the groups location effect its notability? Note: The Memphis metropolitan area has population of 1,280,533. (TnMethTaskForce (talk) 02:34, 3 April 2009 (UTC))
 * While offline references are perfectly acceptable, It is quite a coincidence that all your references for this very contemporary and topical subject are just outside the range of the online archives. It is an even greater coincidence that when you are caught out inserting a reference that can be checked online (Memphis Commercial Appeal), the reference fails to check out and suddenly is replaced by yet another ref just outside the online archive range.  Both the Collierville Herald and the Shelby Sun Times have online archives going back several years, yet your most recent ref is for 2006.  The suspicion must be that these references are quite deliberately chosen for the difficulty of checking them.  If this is genuine, I invite you to e-mail me with a scan of one of these articles, but at the moment I am having a complete failure of good faith over this.  Sp in ni  ng  Spark  13:01, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Why do I feel like I am being attacked? The group is notable. The references are verifiable. I understand your concern but I assure you all I am only here with good intentions. I am still looking into it but I can not yet find a wiki rule or giudeline broken in this article.WP:AGF(TnMethTaskForce (talk) 17:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC))

Also other criminal gang stubs such as Satanas have nearly no information or references.(TnMethTaskForce (talk) 18:53, 6 April 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.