Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Melbourne Scavenger Hunt (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 was delete. Punahou Carnival has more hits, and that's not notable. Sr13 03:28, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

University of Melbourne Scavenger Hunt
AfDs for this article:  Wikipedia is not for things made up at university one day. This yearly contest is unsourced, not notable, and consists primarily of trivia and long lists of winners. Wikipedia is not a forum for self-promotion, or even promotion of the event one organizes.  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  16:32, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Good grief! What the...? Yechiel Man  16:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete the event is simply not notable. Acalamari 19:00, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete- per Yechiel. Eddie  20:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Oh yeah a scavenger hunt, sounds like something for the school website, not wikipedia. -- Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor  ( ταlκ )  22:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Comes up with a grand total of 10 Google hits of which 8 were Wikipedia and mirrors and a 9th was a Boing Boing reference to a vibrator being one of the articles on the hunt. [Google News and Google News Archive come up empty. Severe problems with verifiability with the article. Capitalistroadster 02:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. — Wenli 03:10, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.   -- Capitalistroadster 02:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Well sourced. ExtraDry 05:49, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. There is only one article which could be considered an independent reliable source, and is more like an interview, so therefore not notable. Arguable that it could be in a more broader article about these types of events. Assize 08:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as pure schoolcruft. Highly unencyclopedic. MER-C 08:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. John Vandenberg 13:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Move My Move/Merge opinion from last time still stands.Garrie 21:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, looks like it might be a fun event, but not enough independent sources to indicate notability. Lankiveil 09:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC).
 * Comment 5 Sources is not enough for you? ExtraDry 12:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment, I don't consider "Slashdong.org" or "Dave's Block" to be reliable sources. The other references given are mainly either passing references to scavenger hunts in general, or discuss various incidents of mischief pulled off by uni students before this particular hunt even began.  Lankiveil 12:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC).
 * Comment I don't either but excluding them there are 7 WP:RS. Like them or not they are WP:RS ExtraDry 12:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment, I'm not sure if you're being rhetorical or not. Most of the "RS" are on the "Prosh Week Events", not on the actual scavenger hunt itself.  And again, apart from maybe #7, most of them aren't about the hunt itself, they're about other things that happen.  The Graham Kennedy kidnapping is also irrelevant as it happened decades before this hunt supposedly began.  Lankiveil 15:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC).
 * Keep, per the reasons it was kept at the last AFD. This event is notable because it is arguably the biggest of its kind in the world, and is constantly dogged by controversy.  This is exactly the sort of article that makes Wikipedia well-rounded. Drett 15:32, 21 June 2007 (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.
 * 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.