Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Boys (South African gang)


 * 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   speedy delete. per WP:SNOW, would have been willing to leave this discussion open for longer, but there is absolutely zero sourced material and WP:BLP is also an issue. Cirt (talk) 18:13, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

The Boys (South African gang)

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

Non notable "gang" consisting of a couple of schoolboys. Not much in the way of sources. At best a group known for one very minor event. (see article talk page) Beeblebrox (talk) 06:15, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions.  —Beeblebrox (talk) 06:19, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  —Beeblebrox (talk) 06:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable, unsourced and childish vanity page for a couple of kids. Yinta ɳ   08:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:ORG and lack of sources provided. The article claims that "not much is known about The Boys’ codes" which is yet another example of an article being written so as to make the subject seem mysterious, but actually making the subject seem unverifiable. We used to see that writing style all the time back in 2005 ... and we always deleted those articles. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Snow delete. And spank the children. 9Nak (talk) 09:45, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Four naughty boys who messed up the work of better graffiti artists and misbehaved at school?  They deserve a detention, but they aren't notable. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 11:49, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - So non-notable, that it hurts Mayalld (talk) 13:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete because my gang when I was in school could have kicked their arses.  Oh, and they're really non-notable. -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:N. Full of WP:BLP violations that are continually re-added by the OE or his sockpuppet. Wperdue (talk) 14:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)wperdue
 * Delete Not a single source, fails WP:ONEEVENT, WP:ORG, and laughingly unnotable. Oldlaptop321 (talk) 15:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete They have never been in any serious trouble so would fail WP:ORG and even WP:ONEEVENT. A bloke called AndrewConvosMy Messies 15:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, we have a pretty clear snowball here if we can just find an admin to wield the axe... Beeblebrox (talk) 15:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll get Cirt. He's a pretty good admin for this job. A bloke called AndrewConvosMy Messies 16:30, 27 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.