Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angry mob

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 of the debate was redirect to Ochlocracy – Gurch 13:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Angry mob

This article is nonsense, but not patent nonsense. It contains nothing whihc is not inherently obvious from the title, other than some foolishness about baseball bats and AK-47s. It has been suggested it be merged, I think it is better to merge it with the bitbucket. Just zis Guy you know? 07:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)


  • Keep/Re-direct Look, people arnt going to serarch for Ochlocracy are they? No. Their gonig to search for Angy Mob. Their wasnt even a mention of your precious Ochlocracy on the disambugation page and as creator, I am happy for this article to be merged and then for it to become a redirect. Lay off you Trigger happy buggers! Use some of the content.

Dfrg.msc 10:59, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete as nonsense. Possibly BJAODN as well?--TBCTaLk?!? 07:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Ochlocracy—which would be a valid and very helpful redirect (imho). GeorgeStepanek\talk 08:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Is there a useless nonsense category? Dipics 17:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as nonsense. There's not a whole lot here worth merging. --Coredesat talk 19:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
  • redirect to that word i can't spell. Joeyramoney 23:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
  • redirect somewhere; legit search term. Ochlocracy would work fine, although I think we should also consider Crowd psychology. It depends on whether we think the "Angry mob" searcher would be more interested in the impact of the mob or in how it works. --Allen 03:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Ochlocracy as per User:GeorgeStepanek. How the mob works can be explained within Ochlocracy with appropirate links to Crowd psychology. Crowd psychology is however, more than merely an Angry mob - doesn't have ot be that and often is not.--A Y Arktos\talk 23:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete I don't see it as a useful redirect. Kevin 07:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand. If you read the Wikipedia:Guide to deletion you can see that this page has NPOV, verfibility, and no original research. Why should we delete this page?--Taida 19:40, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Because it is complete bollocks :-) Just zis Guy you know? 19:43, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
      • It is definitely not complete bollocks. Wikipedia defines "complete bollocks" as having only the most tenuous connection to reality and all its facts have a very strong connection to reality.--Taida 01:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
        • I don't believe that it's total rubbish, but the article contains virtually nothing that is not in other articles already—and better written to boot—so at this point making it a redirect is probably the best thing to do. Which is not to say that someone can't write an excellent article about angry mobs in the future. But this is not it. GeorgeStepanek\talk 05:30, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
          • Even if we can't keep this article we should still merge it instead or deleting or redirecting because it does have some good information.--Taida 17:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Thankyou! Taida, for not being delitionist. Dfrg.msc 10:59, 5 July 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.