Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evan handlers

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. (aeropagitica) 09:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Evan handlers

This is a hoax or a non-notable neologism. There are 2 Google hits for the title, neither of which has anything to do with the subject matter of the article. [1] De-prodded without change or comment. Erechtheus 23:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. I thought maybe they misspelled something called "even handlers," which of course has lots of results on Google that have nothing to do with exercise. But searches for "even handlers" paired with "stretch" or "exercise" bring up nothing that has to do with exercise either. Pan Dan 23:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

This article is completely true. It is a new name for the article, that is why it is not well known. Please do not delete this article because it can be very informative to individuals wishing to stretch out before sporting events or any form of exercise.

• The issue is not truth -- it's the appropriateness of the subject for this encyclopedia. See WP:NOT for a start. If this is indeed beneficial, it has its place on the Internet. That place just isn't Wikipedia at this point in time. Erechtheus 19:08, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I first heard of the Evan Handlers stretch four years ago while attending a course on cheerleading instruction. The stretch is both effective, and as said above "beneficial." I don't understand why a person would say that the issue is "not the truth, but the appropriateness" of the subject. How does one decide what is appropriate for Wikipedia, when encyclopedias are supposed to be limitless wealths of knowledge. Excluding valid information from Wikipedia seems detrimental to the very mission of the website.

• "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." That's an official policy of this project. That's a big part of the appropriateness I mentioned above, though there are other concerns that keep verifiable information from being appropriate. Also, go read the WP:NOT document I linked above. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. That's also official policy. Erechtheus 20:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Erechthues' claims are obviously bias becuase he has not heard of or used this stretch before. Please Erechtheus before you continue your arguement think about what you are saying and know that this stretch is real. I have been using this stretch for many years now and i would like to share it with a mass amount of people. Please do not delete this article because as the person above said it is a new name for this article.

• Delete per nom. I find nothing to support verifiability. --Charlesknight 00:20, 24 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.