Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National talk like an aussie day

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. cj | talk 06:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] National talk like an aussie day

Unverifiable article, no sources, Google gives only four hits for "talk like an aussie day". Not yet worth an article. Maybe if it's still around next year... Huon 20:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Clear original research. Some P. Erson 21:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• Save Instead of searching google, check Facebook, I will add the link to the article. There currently are 41 members after a few hours, from across the country, with over 100 members invited and more planned through networking. Just let the article be so that it will have a chance to grow; I don't care if you leave the "hoax" thing on for the next year, just don't delete it. Mastapd 19:41, 6 September 2006
  • Facebook? Delete. Tracker/TTV (myTalk|myWork|myInbox) 01:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• Oh, I'm sorry, I don't have the money or the time to go and rent server space and code a whole new website. Facebook is what i have time for, being in school and all. Mastapd 22:00 6 Sept, 2006
• Delete Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. - Narcisse 03:02, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• Seriously? Facebook is the source? Boy, are there a lot of articles I could write! Delete. GassyGuy 03:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Made up at university this week. Of course, for me every day is like an Aussie day. :>)Capitalistroadster 03:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• This is getting into a very immature junior high, bicker-fest. I realize that Facebook seems like an invalid "source" but it is easily one of the fastest ways to spread information and gain support. As a college student, being involved in Facebook, I realize it's potential as a tool and I am exploiting it as such. Life is lived day-to-day and there are countless desicions made therein. Good examples of this exist throughout Wikipedia, International Speak Like a Pirate Day, The Flying Spaghetti Monster? These and many other articles were born out of a whim made by someone, one day. The GHSM has legitimacy now because the guy, after being spurred on my collegues wrote a book and such. And Pirate Day? that was just another joke among friends that caught on. The only difference in this situation is that I am being proactive and utilizing the tools available to me in my situation. So, please, just let it be and let it grow; it will happen. And if it doesn't, if people just forget about it by December or sometime that the Wikicommunity sets, I'll delete the article myself. Please. Mastapd 22:10 6 Sept. 2006
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 04:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Wikipedia documents topics after they become notable. It is not a publicist's tool. Plus, "One Last 'Crikey!' for Steve Irwin" has way more members anyway. Okay, that's not really germaine to the discussion, but, what I'm saying is, if it catches on like that wretchedly idiotic spaghetti monster, then I'm sure people will support the article, but for now, this isn't the place for it. GassyGuy 04:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• You're right Gassy, that group does have way more articles, and I apologize for making it seem as though Wikipedia was being misused as a publicist tool, I understand where that comes from. But you can see that there is different support throughout many communities involving this subject; so why isn't this still the place for the article, if I combine membership with the 'one last Crikey' group and all the other steve irwin group within the next week, I'll have, conservatively, 2500 members. That growth may happen without said merge anyways. When's the cutoff? And when Aussy Day rolls around next year and I have 10000 people saying 'crikey', should I go through all this again, only to be rejected again? (Though i'm not saying i have the power to compell 10000 people, it's just a figure of speech) Wikipedia is supposed to be 'Open Source' info, at least that's the way it was described in... Time Magazine? when it was featured, but who is it open to? My group of 75 supporters? 200? 10000? what are the qualifications to be included in the open source? Mastapd
• Delete. The difference between this and International Speak Like a Pirate Day and The Flying Spaghetti Monster (and other things made up in school one day, such as Rugby football) is that there are multiple reliable independant sources verifying those things. Talk Like an Aussie Day isn't (currently) verifiable, which is why Wikipedia shouldn't have an article on it. --Mako 04:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• If it gets deleted, I'll wait a week for other sources to get set up, then I'll be back.
• Delete - made up concept that has no place in an article - 09:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. I tried to explain that it probably violates WP:NFT to the author when xe removed my prod template. --Gray Porpoise 19:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• Sorry, I didn't mean to remove that, I think my mouse went crazy when i was highlighting something else to delete--Mastapd

That's okay, people make mistakes. Unless that's a made-up excuse... Anyways, please wait until a made-up holiday gains merits other than being listed on Facebook. --Gray Porpoise 23:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Nide idea. Please add a page when you have the support of at least one nation. --Walter Görlitz 04:33, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete - definitely NOT notable or verifiable. Given the creator's threats to set this page up again, I'd also call for an admin to watch this page for recreation. (JROBBO 11:44, 9 September 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.