Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hornet Mafia

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. - Mailer Diablo 11:55, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hornet Mafia

Delete as Non-notable neologism. In fact, article asserts its non-notability in its nonexistence in any Reliable Sources. WP:V violations by its own admission in use of newsgroups, blog comments, and other unverifiable sources to prop up original research, WP:OR violation as none of the sources support any of the statements contained herein. Definition of "hornet mafia" is not given and constitutes WP:OR. 34 unique hits on google, all forums or blog comments. No Lexis-Nexis nor Proquest nor Google Scholar[1] results. I am wondering if it is possible to CSD this on its assertion of non-notability. Ah, unfortuantely non-assertion of notability only applies to people and groups. Mmx1 20:20, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

• Does not violate WP:OR. The term exists in cyberspace
• Does not violate WP:V. Google search proves the term exists and is widely used
• Only used newsgroup sources to prove existence of term, since this is the ONLY space where it exists, as is explained by the article. Newsgroups are not good enough to prove whether the Hornet Mafia in fact exists, but certainly does prove the term and its usage exists.
• Numa Numa is an example of a phenomenon that did not exist in any "reliable" source, but nevertheless is worthy of noting because it existed, even if only in cyberspace. Not everything has to be in the Encyclopedia Brittanica to be a valid, verifiable article.
• Anti-semitism and racism are points of view, this however does not prevent documenting a term for this point of view.
• Does not meet any of the criterion below for an article needing to be deleted.
• Therefore does not meet --matador300 21:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Note: table deleted and moved to talk. Cite by reference, not inclusion. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 00:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment the poster above who posted the large table and the like seems to have forgotten the notability guidelines. Just because something isn't OR and is verifiable does not mean it belongs on Wikipedia. — Dark Shikari ^talk/_contribs 00:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Neoligism or jargon. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 05:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Very relevant to F-14 history --matador300 17:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Wikipedia is not a platform for explanations of every obscure term that can be found on the Internet. This article simply seems to be a soapbox for advocacy of a specific airplane. See WP:NOT Dabarkey 16:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. There is not a single person named as a part of this supposed group. Forums are not sources for an encyclopedia. Dual Freq 22:40, 10 August 2006 (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.