Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Sarah Palin Bell


 * 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 G10 / G3. A neutral, well-sourced article about the incident and resulting media reaction may be appropriate. This piece of satire is not. --B (talk) 19:47, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

The Sarah Palin Bell

 * – ( View AfD View log )

It is utter trivia and written in an irretrievably POV style. A minor political gaffe among many political gaffes. Could be better covered (if at all) in the Palin article. A non-notable ephemeral news story. PROD was removed. Sitush (talk) 12:28, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * What seems to me as utterly trivial is trying to protect a wiki site's encyclopedic integrity when there is no encyclopedic integrity to begin with. Your attempt to destroy my wiki page will succeed only because it, like this entire site, is a joke not to be taken seriously. And your(comment above) attempt to protect the continuity of it's content is utterly pitiful. To protect that which no one can be held responsibile for is like protected a construction worker's advice on a medical procedure, it's ridiculous. To think that anyone cares about your boring self-serving criticism is laughable. You are a joke to those who are true scholars of knowledge and academic respect. Nothing you have ever contributed to this site's articles or edits will be respected or acknowledged to any level of the educated. You are a mere troll, pretending your time here means something to someone or that you indeed are contributing to something much greater than yourself. In truth, this site is pure entertainment; something to do between the hours of Facebook and Youtube. Much more insignificant than anyone wishes to believe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Special:Contributions/ (talk) 14:16, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Probably nonnotable; prose in current form is irreparable in terms of POV issues even if it were. Martinp (talk) 14:32, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. This is satire about a politician's comments, not a description of something that actually exists. Palin's comments on Paul Revere might merit at most a couple of sentences in an existing Palin-related article, but certainly not an article like this. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:52, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per the above. Badgernet  ₪  14:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep There seem to be two objections: (1) the discussion could be merged into Palin's page, and (2) the style is not sufficiently academic.  The first objection is meritless.  This page discusses a distinct issue surrounding Palin, much like the "birth certificate" issue surrounding Obama deserves a separate entry from the generic "Barack Obama" web page.  The "bell" issue, all by itself, has generated so much discussion (e.g., on the stories that policitians make up, on the inability of politicians to admit mistakes, on the tendency of a politician's supporters to rally around the politician in the face of overwhelming evidence) that it deserves its own page.  Thus, I strenuously disagree with Metropolitan90s comments.  The fact is that the political event that this article discusses "actually exists," even if the bell does not.  (By the way, using that logic, should entries for all fictional people, places, and things be deleted?  Of course not.)  Regarding the second objection, the tone and content of the article can be improved using traditional wikipedia processes instead of outright deleting the page.  --67.200.173.53 (talk) 17:46, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  — -- Cirt (talk) 19:04, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  — -- Cirt (talk) 19:04, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  — -- Cirt (talk) 19:05, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alaska-related deletion discussions.  — -- Cirt (talk) 19:05, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  — -- Cirt (talk) 19:05, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions.  — -- Cirt (talk) 19:05, 7 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. POV drivel. -- Necrothesp (talk) 19:20, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: Whether satire, hoax or drivel - something not assuaged or cured by the creator's comments above - it is clear that this is definitely a WP:BULLSHIT case.  Ravenswing  19:24, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:26, 7 June 2011 (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.