Talk:Ancient Order of Turtles
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 3/5/2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
[edit] Answers
Shouldn't there be answers for the joke questions? I myself don't know the answers, and feel that the humor is not fully explained if the answers aren't explained. --Brandon Dilbeck 21:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- No, the answers should NOT be provided. Why give easy access of membership to such an illustrious organization? And why reveal the secrets of the club? Those who wish to become turtles, can research the answers. Stepp-Wulf 01:30, 1 May 2006 (UTC).
- Then perhaps it would be more appropriate to create questions based on the specific type of humor to illustrate the type of humor without revealing the club's secret questions. I just think that readers, such as myself, shouldn't be kept in the dark about such things. --Brandon Dilbeck 02:35, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
- I think he was joking. Anyway, I remember reading most if not all of these questions in a magazine and they provided the answers, so Wikipedia wouldn't be the first to reveal this to a mass public. CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 09:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- Well, if anyone was really curious anyway, they could just look in the article's history. --Brandon Dilbeck 17:54, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I feel that's odd reasoning. Articles are for public consumption- people read our articles, but we don't ask them to look into the history. Why should they have to, when articles themselves are meant to inform (and not to tease, with hints?) CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 04:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
- Well, if anyone was really curious anyway, they could just look in the article's history. --Brandon Dilbeck 17:54, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- I think he was joking. Anyway, I remember reading most if not all of these questions in a magazine and they provided the answers, so Wikipedia wouldn't be the first to reveal this to a mass public. CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 09:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- Then perhaps it would be more appropriate to create questions based on the specific type of humor to illustrate the type of humor without revealing the club's secret questions. I just think that readers, such as myself, shouldn't be kept in the dark about such things. --Brandon Dilbeck 02:35, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I have followed and researched the Turtle Club for many years, although I disagree with giving the answers to the riddles, as that is part of the induction into the club, there were (and still are) only four riddles to be asked and answered. Other riddles have been added, answers provided, and password given throughout the years by those who don't fully understand the meaning and importance of the club or the history behind it. It upsets me to see people have lost respect of these things. You don't see other groups handing out their information (skull and bones, free masons, etc.) so why should the members of the Turtles do this? (one of the unspoken rules of the club is no membership dues or money is to be made in the name of the Turtles, so shame on all those sites that sell fake membership cards and t-shirts) 70.109.71.96 20:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)refinishingtouch@aol.com
- I started this article, which then became a bed of contention, and I have not have had time to introduce more material. However, I agree with the above comment, in not wanting to have the answers in the article. Come on. folks, figure therm out yourselves! Stepp-Wulf 02:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC).
Why is Schirra described as a 'Grand Potentate' in rank, yet this doesn't appear on the ranks list? User:Andy DingleyUser:Andy Dingley 15:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Notability still in question?
Can we remove the notability flag as notability seems to have been established in the deletion discussion. Ratwerks (talk) 16:26, 26 December 2007 (UTC) Roger...I took it down. Legotech (talk) 04:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- Well, our reliable sourcing policy might be a concern. I'm not a Mason nor am I particularly interested in their history (except as far as entertaining conspiracy theories go) so I couldn't vouch for the factual accuracy of that Masonic museum, but it seems fairly legit. The other sources are pretty dubious.John Nevard (talk) 01:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
