Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/9/11: The Great Illusion

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. Grandmasterka 01:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 9/11: The Great Illusion

No assertion of notability. How notable can a video that attributes 9/11 to the Illuminati be, anyway?

• Delete. Gazpacho 01:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, also has no reliable sources Strike that, it has no sources at all. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 01:23, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Search results for this don't turn up reliable sources that discuss the video. --Aude (talk contribs) 01:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete — per nom JChap2007 02:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Delete It has 10,200 hits on google, and it might be, according to some reliable source we haven't yet found, truly notable. All the same, however, I don't see any sources that have much proof of notability on Google, and the article itself doesn't assert notability in any meaningful way. So ultimately I must conclude that deletion is the best policy here. NigelQuinine ^{Blather• Toil} 02:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete — per above. SynergeticMaggot 04:26, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per SynergeticMaggot. ⇒ JarlaxleArtemis 04:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Conspiracycruft. StarryEyes 07:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Though this video has some cult following on the Bit Torrent networks, that is about it...but...um...I don't download videos so...yeah. --Brian ^{(How am I doing?)} 14:13, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep This sucks. Has anyone even seen this video at all? The issue of steel burning at 1800 degrees fahrenheit and jet fuel burning at 1200 degrees fahrenheit has not even been touched for the same reason this video exists. Okay, the illuminati thing goes too far and can be avoided, but the allegations are worth noting, don't you think? Coolguy1368 17 August 11:15 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia is not the place to document things that haven't been documented outside of Wikipedia. Please cite sources upon which an article about this video can be based. Uncle G 17:09, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
  • FYI we have an article that covers reliably sourced disputes about the attacks. And official conclusions don't claim that steel "burned" so no, that is not worth noting. Gazpacho 17:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, this fails WP:V as it is unsourced... though I think the fact that there are no reliable sources points to a sinister Illuminati conspiracy to suppress this film!(fnord)--Isotope23 16:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Coolguy1368 can you base keep on a ration reason? While I respect you, your arguement is weak in the face of the matter that Wikipedia does not keep articles based on if they are interesting or not. Wikipedia's three content policies are Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in the main namespace. Because the three policies are complementary, they should not be interpreted in isolation from one another, and editors should therefore try to familiarize themselves with all three. These three policies are non-negotiable and cannot be superseded by other policies or guidelines, or by editors' consensus So if you believe it should be kept, please provide a reason that these pillars of the wiki community should be put asside for this one article. --Brian ^{(How am I doing?)} 16:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete seems to be wholly unverifiable Mallanox 21:14, 21 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.