Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Rose (BDSM organization)

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 was keep. Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 03:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Black Rose (BDSM organization)

I proposed this for deletion for lack of real notability, and no real content edits in over a year. It was then deprodded, with two additional references (the first content edits in over a year!), so I am taking it to AfD. So far all third-party references are from two online news sites, the first from 1999, the second from 2003. Weak delete. JIP | Talk 07:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

  • This is weak either way. The club has managed to get itself in the news (and the Salon and WorldNetDaily articles are not insignificant) so I vote for Weak keep. Incidentally, this group sounds utterly appalling and like most people I wish it didn't exist, but that's not a reason to delete the article. Allon Fambrizzi 08:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi
  • Weak delete for the same reasons that Allon Fambrizzi mentioned, but I fall slightly on the other side of the fence on this one. Simply no notabliity.SkierRMH 10:12, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - Notability seems pretty obvious to me. Due to the nature of their purpose I wouldn't expect a whole lot of third party verification, but they have obviously garnered some media attention. They seem pretty active still so it's not a case of being has-beens. Perhaps they're just better at keeping out of the scornful view of main-stream America. The article could definitely use some attention, but I don't think that an article should be frequently edited in order to avoid an AfD. wtfunkymonkey 10:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Verifiable and sourced; noteworthy per multiple independent reliable sources. Needs cleanup and expansion, but neither of those is a valid reason for deletion. Shimeru 10:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per wtfunkymonkey. Amists talk • contribs 14:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep Black Rose is one of the biggest and most influential and important BDSM groups in the country. They host huge events, they promote a huge aspect of safety, security, and comfort within the BDSM community. I have been quite active in "the lifestyle" in the past, and Black Rose is a very well respected and important aspect of BDSM history and culture. Missvain 17:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep - Black Rose is also very gun-shy of the open press. This is one of those unhappy situations where if you aren't in "the lifestyle" you may not hear about it. It does need some cleanup and expansion, I agree. --ElaragirlTalk|Count 21:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
    They are somewhat written about, in semi-independant media. A book (added to list of references) includes information about Black Rose. --ElaragirlTalk|Count 21:48, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Notability of the group isn't overwhelmingly obvious, but what is there seems sufficient. RFerreira 05:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep per Missvain. Danny Lilithborne 08:40, 17 November 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.