Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The bizarre

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE, 20 votes to delete, 6 to keep, with 1 vote to merge. Postdlf 02:10, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

The bizarre
This is a collection of some strange stories that, as of the time I am writing this, involve chickens and a sausage. There isn't any unifying concept other than how likely it is that they will be seen as...bizarre. I just can't see any way this constitutes an article. Delete. Postdlf 07:38, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Should have speedy deleted it while I had the chance. Moncrief 07:42, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * I did speedy it once, but after the contributor (who is not a newbie, btw) recreated it and expanded it further, I thought this would be a better resolution. I also don't know that it's technically nonsense.  I don't think the stories are hoaxes, they just don't really relate to each other beyond tone, and I don't think any of them on their own are notable.  Postdlf 07:46, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not suitable material for an encyclopedia.-gadfium 08:25, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep- the author of the infamous article here - admittedly it needs some work - but I don't see why with some work it can't evolve into something more interesting and useful. Jumping on the article within seconds of its creation doesn't really give it much of a change to breath and have exposure to the Wiki community who will no doubt be able to expand on it. The subject of the bizarre - which at the moment isn't represented is a bona fide subject and could do with some exposure. The topic is no more ridiculous than many of the other unusual articles on WIki especially as on the Unusual articles section. The few bits in the article are well sourced and actual bizarre events - Lighten up and give the article a chance! Brookie 08:59, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * You've summarized a Times news report from 2005-04-20 (yesterday) and summarized an AFP news report from 2005-02-10. Brookie, news summaries are one of the things that the newspaper explicitly does and Wikinews:Category:Wackynews is calling to you, loudly and clearly.  It hasn't seen enough activity of late.  Wikinews needs you! Uncle G 14:23, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC)
 * I don't see the need for this article, but its subsections (such as Mike the headless chicken, which to my surprise turned out to be true) may be interesting elsewhere (see WP:UA). Or in a section of Wikinews. Delete. Radiant_* 10:49, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - whacky and a bit raw - but something to work on here. There is a story about a Japanese fishing boat sunk by a flying cow - which would go well in here - I'm with Bookie on this. McGnasher 12:48, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd forgotten about that one - updated the article for it.
 * This isn't an encyclopaedia article, it's a collection of news summaries (with a reference to Mike the headless chicken added for flavour). Maybe there's an encyclopaedia article to be had on the bizarre as a concept, although I suspect that it will be tremendously difficult to pin down what the concept actually is.  This isn't such an article, though.  As it stands, this is just Wackynews stories in the encyclopaedia, rather than in the newspaper where they belong.  As Radiant! points out, we already have WP:UA for a list of bizarre, off-beat, and unusual encyclopaedia articles.  And in all of the time that we've had it no-one has yet pinned down an encyclopaedia article on the unusual. Delete, and strongly encourage the author and McGnasher to come and to contribute to the section of Wikinews devoted to taking just this sort of this stuff. Uncle G 14:23, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC)
 * Brookie here - I will investigate the Wikinews which I haven't really looked at to date. On another point, how can stuff get into WP:UA if the articles to go in there are deleted! Brookie 14:43, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * From your article here, it looks like Wackynews will be right up your street. As for the latter question: Mike the Headless Chicken, which you've done a lot of work on, is already listed in WP:UA, and hasn't been deleted.  So the question is somewhat moot. Uncle G 15:44, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC)
 * It does look pretty cool, but we already have this covered in Unusual articles, right? Merge this article onto that list. --Idont Havaname 14:54, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * This page as I understand is only a clearing house for the more wacky articles - not a place where the articles live unsupported. There's always Bad_jokes_and_other_deleted_nonsense Brookie 15:53, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Not encyclopedic. Delete. - Mike Rosoft 16:20, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete I can see Unusual articles, but as summerized above, this just doesn't belong here. --InShaneee 19:05, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. It is more suited for Wikinews. Zzyzx11 | Talk 19:37, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unencyclopedic. Kill it before it expands.  RickK 20:02, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, so you are indicating that it CAN become unequivicably encyclopedic, and thus immune to deletion, but somehow that offends you. - Pioneer-12 15:51, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Feco 21:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's not an encyclopedia article.  Rossami (talk) 05:20, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for so many reasons: nonencyclopedic, partly dicdef, partly unverifiable, potentially POV (what seems bizarre to one person may not seem so to another), the list goes on and on... --Angr/comhrá 05:30, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Moncrief should have speedy deleted it while s/he had the chance. El_C 07:28, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki into Wikinews and delete - Skysmith 08:56, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Wikipedia is big enough for the bizzare. Klonimus
 * Delete. Wikipedia is neither Wikinews nor an Odditorium. --Carnildo 22:17, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, trivial, not encyclopaedic. Megan1967 06:04, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Definate Keep I do not see what is wrong with the article, it is perfectly factual, I found the article amusing and quite interesting. Definatly KEEP Electricmoose 14:11, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete while the content may be factual its not placed in any coherent context. Its like an episode of Mythbusters. Andypasto 08:42, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Bizarre is a complex concept worthy of Wikipedia and worthy of serious study. Bizarre is a statement of being extremely unusual, to the point of seeming to bend reality. Ripley's Believe It or Not! has a whole chain of museums on the subject. The article does need some improvement, though. - Pioneer-12 14:24, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete not encyclopedic, utterly unsourced, unverifiable. CDC   (talk)  23:31, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-encyclopedic. Unverifiable. utcursch | talk 11:44, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete zellin 20:35, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.