Sony doraemon
AfD nomination of Goon Of Fortune edit
I have nominated Goon Of Fortune, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Goon Of Fortune. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. ukexpat (talk) 13:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Goon Of Fortune edit
A tag has been placed on Goon Of Fortune, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Bfigura (talk) 22:33, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
OK, so I guess the moral of the story is don't bother creating any articles on Goon Of Fortune - Wikipedia admins see it as "non-notable" because it's not familiar, even though there are plenty of references out there to verify it (Google it!)... Sure they might not be the most reliable references, but the number of unique references suggests that it's clearly a real game which is prevalent in Australian society, and it's not made up as other people have suggested. What kind of drinking game is "notable" anyway? And as another user said, how do you expect to find references to DRINKING GAMES in any academic form? The only reason that the article is always deleted is because some people are xenophobic. The inclusion of this article would greatly contribute to the inclusion of Australian cultural content within Wikipedia... but who cares, it's only Australia.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Sony doraemon (talk • contribs)
- Nope. The moral of the story is that in order to have an encycopedia article, the subject itself and the information appearing in the article has to be the subject of substantive treatment in reliable sources which show that the wider world has taken note of the subject by publishing about it, and which sources verify the information contained in the article. The fact that the name of the game gets lots of Google hits is irrelevant to this standard. To put it another way, if you recreate the article citing to reliable sources verifying the content and showing that it has been the subject of significant treament in reliable sources, it will not be deleted. It would not greatly contribute to Australian cultural content or anything else because this is not a compendium of any type of informatiion it is an encyclopedia with all that that implies; a tertiary source by definition. Encyclopedias are restricted to encyclopedic material.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:49, 29 June 2008 (UTC)