Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Black Water 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 no consensus. I'm calling this "no consensus" since there's no option for "will keep momentarily to move the article to user space." Drmies (talk) 03:40, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

The Black Water Society

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence of notability, Google searches turned up nothing remotely reliable. At best, this is a case of WP:TOOSOON. Everymorning (talk) 00:04, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 00:05, 26 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete. Wikipedia is not a WP:CRYSTALBALL or advertising. I couldn't find a single source even mentioning this book, either that or its WP:TOOSOON, as mentioned above editorEهեইдအ😎 00:06, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:13, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:13, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

-Move As the author of this project, which has been underway for 4 years, I have infinite more authority on the subject than this individual who had nothing better to do with his time than flag a page I created literally after 5-10 minutes. This was my first page creation and I was in the process of trying to add a template with more information when I found out that my 10-minute old page was flagged. This is a real project and if the page is not deleted by tomorrow, there will be more information. Of course there is no other information available on the net if this is the first time details of the project are being disclosed. The project is registered and protected by the Library of Congress, as well as registered with the WGA. Maybe if I had more than 10 minutes to provide additional information I could provide an amount that would suffice Mr. Everymorning's strict requirements for a page's infancy. UnorthodoxMinds —Preceding undated comment added 00:37, 26 March 2016 (UTC) - Delete/Move to userspace If this article is really going to be notable, I'll assume WP:GOODFAITH and just say this gets moved to the creator's userspace. Otherwise, delete. Programming G E E K (mah page! // use words to communicate page) 02:06, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not only is it WP:TOOSOON, the article was created by someone closely related to the subject of the article, and who is apparently going to attempt to exercise ownership of the article. Regarding the complaint about the speed of the AFD listing, perhaps if the article author had taken a moment to note any of the numerous suggestions automatically made during the process of creating the article we wouldn't be having this discussion. -- &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  01:17, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

-Move I can assure your good faith is not misplaced. What would moving the page to my user space entail, and would it be allowed to be moved back out of my user space after more information/citations/website/social media are provided? UnorthodoxMinds

-Move Thank you very much for the suggestion of moving this article to my user space while it is developed further. I strongly appreciate this, and your good faith, considering other veteran users seem much more interested in just increasing their "page delete count' rather than actually bettering the service provided by wikipedia to its readers. In the future I will be more careful to abide by this process. Thank you again Programming Geek. UnorthodoxMinds

-Move And perhaps if you took the time to develop interpersonal skills rather than spending your valuable time, your life, "patrolling the web" you could have offered me, as a novice page creator, advice or at the very least address me directly--ping me--rather than saying "the article author" and ignoring me... Instead you just say I should have looked out for suggestions, which did not exist at the time of the page creation, obviously. I didn't even know how to add an argument for the salvation of the page properly until now; how is that fair? I can assure you regardless of what happens with this current witch trial, and without me, the good people of Pittsburgh will have this page back up and heavily cited in a matter of weeks. Black Water is a project that locals in various Pittsburgh districts have been eager for for several months and will happily show their full fledged support for. And there was nothing on this page I was going to list that could not be 100% verified through legal documentation or other such sources. No speculation or bias whatsoever. Though, how can bias exist for things like "page length"... You didn't think it would be appropriate considering my newbie status to consider a "good faith" suggestion like the user above (Programming Geek)? Why not suggest it being moved to my user space considering it WILL be notable? You didn't think that would be more appropriate than a robotic "DELETE". Ridiculous for a veteran member such as yourself who should be helping novices: you sir lack the qualities of leadership UnorthodoxMinds

- Comment Moving it to your userspace would allow you to edit it as a draft, and when more sources/article is completed it can be moved back into an article. If you need more help please visit my talk page. Thanks Programming G E E K (mah page! // use words to communicate page) 03:29, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

-Comment I apologize for not reaching you on your talk page but I visited the link and am unsure how to communicate there. I will read up on that tonight. One last quick question: Am I allowed to move the page right this moment to my user space? Even though this hearing for it's fate is currently underway? If I can do this I'll just move it right now. UnorthodoxMinds -- See below Programming G E E K (mah page! // use words to communicate page)

- Request to move I understand that the majority may be in favor of deleting this, but under WP:GOODFAITH I'm going to move this page to User:UnorthodoxMinds/The Black Water Society if there is no objection in three hours (reasonable?) thanks Programming G E E K (mah page! // use words to communicate page) 03:37, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hold on: I'll move it for you and close this discussion. UnorthodoxMinds, it's not easy watching your article go up for deletion. However, that is not a reason to try and rip old Uncle Milty a new one. The problem with the article, first of all, is that it lacks reliable sources that verify that the article is indeed on a notable topic so that it may pass our guidelines (in general WP:GNG). Thank you, Drmies (talk) 03:39, 26 March 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.