Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sociables (2nd nomination)


 * 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 of the debate was Keep. --Luigi30 (&Tau;&alpha;&lambda;&kappa; &tau;&omicron; m&epsilon;) 22:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Sociables
One of the unsourced, and at this time externally unverifiable drinking game articles listed in a mass deletion earlier today (Articles for deletion/Circle of Death (drinking game)) Per the closing statement of this aborted mass-nomination, this is an individual relist of the article. -- Saberwyn 07:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete drunkcruft.ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 08:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Adding a request for verifiable sources to this article page would be a good way to start this process.  Not having verification isn't an automatic deletion criterion, being unverifiable is - an important distinction.  Before nominating an article for deletion, shouldn't the nominator at least research the article themselves, adding the sources if possible?  I haven't tackled notability as this is not the reason given for nomination, but all drinking game are cultural memes that have lasted in many cases for centuries and appear in various places in popular literature etc. Vizjim 11:41, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep notable drinking games, this game is listed in a number of purchasable "drinking game tins," with cards describing the games. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 13:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per User:Blnguyen. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * "Drunkcruft" is not part of the deletion policy. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 18:12, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Alas, but WP:NOT is; qualifies under Not an indiscriminate collection, number 8 (instruction manual). Angus McLellan  (Talk) 19:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. I presume that in referring to WP:NOT you are specifically talking about "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information", point 8?  This says, I quote - Instruction manuals - while Wikipedia has descriptions of people, places, and things, Wikipedia articles should not include instruction - advice (legal, medical, or otherwise), suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, video game guides, and recipes.  An article on "Sociables" has the obvious potential to contain a) history and evolution of the game, b) its cultural significance, c) appearances in books, on TV shows, in films etc, and thus is more than simply a collection of rules (it doesn't matter if these things are not there or haven't been completed: the fact is, they could be inserted).  However, the rules need to be included as otherwise it would be impossible to give a clear idea of the game - and I presume you are not arguing that the entries for Chess and Soccer should be deleted? Vizjim 10:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * So delete the instructions. Problem solved. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 00:07, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as how-to. Brian G. Crawford 21:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Not just because I'm the creater of the article, but because I just added some sources. The 'Play' section, yes I'll admit is a 'how-to'. But that can easily be changed. NetStormer 06:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Update. I just cut down about 80-90% of the 'play' section. Might be enough to get this page kept.
 * Another update. Revised the card assignments section and removed any POV statements I could find. (In case you're wondering, I'm kind of hell bent on keping this article.) NetStormer 07:55, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Wikipedia is not paper; this is a sub page of the drinking game article.  JeffBurdges 15:30, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete nn drinking game. Eusebeus 02:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per indiscriminate information & non-notability. Kuzaar 19:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * keep please this is not indiscriminate information Yuckfoo 01:21, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * keep I have a feeling that this is WP:POINT we have alot of "serious articles" that aren't sourced either, why not delete those, too? Dspserpico 17:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * weak delete Due to the point about this being an instruction manual. It seems to belong either in Wiktionary or perhaps as a two-sentence entry in "Drinking Games".Apollo 10:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete no reliable sources appear to exist for this game; only sources in the article are three web sites. As it currently stands, that people actually play this game is unverifiable. - Liberatore(T) 18:00, 10 May 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.