Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wadsworth constant


 * 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. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:38, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Wadsworth constant

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Keep per the fact that it shouldnt be considered made up if people have adopted the idea. History happens every second, if we report on it within an hour on Wikipedia it should not be considered false information.

Delete per WP:MADEUP Mr. Vernon (talk) 01:38, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Keep Everything was made up by someone, at some point; The 'MADE UP' argument is completely invalid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.147.104.141 (talk) 02:31, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Delete per WP:MADEUP among other things. Zechola (talk) 01:51, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

delete&mdash;not just made up, made up by people on reddit. shouldn't we have a special speedy category just for that?&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 01:52, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete for the reasons already mentioned, plus, it is original research that is unreferenced. No significant coverage in reliable sources.   Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  01:56, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Delete for same reasons as above. -- Mythe (talk) 02:03, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Speedy delete WP:MADEUP, who cares anyway? I've tagged it as a hoax. → Σ  τ  c. 02:08, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

delete&mdash; Made up see --McSly (talk) 02:13, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

DO NOT DELETE I believe in the "theory" of this constant. Research is still being done currently sure about it and the article will be updated if any research concludes inconclusive. I say for now we should let this be and see where it goes. Mind you the word "Noogie" was made up and then entered finally into the Webster's Dictionary a few years back. Not to mention that if there are any articles on "string theory" they too should be deleted as they are just theories and NOT proven true.

Now to test the Wadsworth Constant here and now. The above has 88 words so by the constant taking out the first 30% would leave me at "concludes inconclusive. I say for now we should let this be and see where it goes. Mind you the word "Noogie" was made up and then entered finally into the Webster's Dictionary a few years back. Not to mention that if there are any articles on "string theory" they too should be deleted as they are just theories and NOT proven true." Rounding this to the nearest logical point.

"I say for now we should let this be and see where it goes. Mind you the word "Noogie" was made up and then entered finally into the Webster's Dictionary a few years back. Not to mention that if there are any articles on "string theory" they too should be deleted as they are just theories and NOT proven true." HOLY CRAP IT WORKS! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyfreeze (talk • contribs) 02:10, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we should consider closing this discussion per WP:SNOWBALL? --Mr. Vernon (talk) 02:12, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, but the difference is that the examples you provided have received academic coverage. The Wadsworth constant hasn't. → Σ  τ  c . 02:13, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

You might be correct however sir what do you define as academic? When Socrates created the "Academy" he had the idea of Question everything. Which is what we are doing now. I am a philosophy major and I might just write my thesis on this constant. Which in turn I believe would make it academic.


 * comment&mdash;the guy's cheerful and believes in his thingy, i'll give him that. this looks like it is about to become a freak show.&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 02:17, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Keep&mdash; I don't see why just because reddit created this that it merits deletion. Internet phenomena easily make their way onto wikipedia because they are well-known (see internet meme and Epic Fail.) It doesn't matter who created it. The Wadsworth constant is one of those things: well-known and new. That's why it deserves to be on here. - 72.76.254.220 (talk) 02:20, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Except those too have received coverage by the press, academia, etc. → Σ  τ  c . 02:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Not notable. Not anything really... AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:22, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. per WP:SNOW and WP:MADEUP. I don't see why this is even being taken seriously enough for an AfD when it should have just gotten a CSD and been done with. Trusilver  02:28, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm going to call this a G3 hoax. → Σ  τ  c . 02:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to endorse that. Trusilver  02:31, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep This deserves its own page on Wikipedia. It is actually accurate, and shouldn't just be deleted because it is from Reddit. Dfabs2 (talk) 02:30, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I smell sock or meatpuppetry. → Σ  τ  c . 02:32, 2 October 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.