Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Branding Iron

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. - Mailer Diablo 08:55, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Branding Iron

Branding Iron (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Stub article from April 2006 on a fairly low circulation student rag. No assertion of notability, and advertisement in tone. Prod contested because "the article is not harming anyone. Students from this school may begin to like Wikipedia and even consider editing Wikipedia more if they see their newspaper has an article of its own" Ohconfucius 01:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete as advertising and studentpapercruft. Students from this school may begin to like Wikipedia... . Say what? Does that mean I'll start 'liking' the New York Times if they'll publish my articles? Sheesh! Eddie.willers 01:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

That means you will start liking Wikipedia because it does not arbitrarily delete things which you think are worth mentioning in the biggest encyclopedia in the world and which don´t harm absolutely no one. You will start liking Wikipedia because you are free to make articles about topics which so far could not be part of a encyclopedia because they were made of paper and their writers didn´t have the time to write about it. A.Z. 05:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

• Strong delete. We'll just have to get by somehow without the editing skills of the students of University of Wyoming. Saikokira 02:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean by that? That those students could not help Wikipedia? That you don´t wish them to become users? A.Z. 05:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete -- Advertisement for their student newspaper. ~~Eugene2x ^{Sign here} ☺ ~~ 02:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean by "advertisement"? The reasons anyone had to creating this article don´t matter at all. It can very well have been created as advertisement, but it is just some useful information about a topic people may or may not be interested in. A.Z. 05:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

• • Comment with regard to A.Z's comments above. Firstly, I do not see the rationale behind A.Z. picking holes in the above arguments without stating his/her own position. Indeed, I would call such a stance vexatious - in that it adds nothing to the debate. Secondly, looking at A.Z's contribution history it would appear that he/she has a strong interest in LBGT matters and comments on the Reference Desk, but has largely stayed away from AFD discussions. Thirdly, the above comments all reference this article wrt to Wiki policies and/or standards yet A.Z. appears to take the position that all contributors to this AFD discussion are, thus far, in error. So, what gives, A.Z? Are you for or against this nomination and on what grounds? Let's see your colours. Eddie.willers 05:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
    • It adds to the debate the fact that the arguments had holes. Users debating may find it interesting. I do. My contribution history has nothing to do with this discussion, so talking about it is really just chatting about another subject. Let´s chat: you got it right that I have strong interest in LGBT matters and that I stayed away from AFD discussions. That doesn´t really say anything about the deletion of the article on the Branding Iron. I am against the deletion because of the students of the University of Wyoming who may be offended by this deletion and really should be. A.Z. 07:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
• 'Delete WP:N /Blaxthos 06:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Due to lack of notablity. --RaiderAspect 06:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

• Keep because of the students. A.Z. 07:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment A.Z. I strongly suggest you review Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. Wikipedia has no intention to become the source of all knowledge. --RaiderAspect 07:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I can see that. But letting this one article exist doesn´t imply the contrary. It´s just that one person bothered to create it and a few people may bother to edit it in the future and to make it better. And it is good that new users are allowed to start editing Wikipedia by creating and editing an article which pleases them and does not harm anyone whatsoever. A.Z. 08:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Non-notable group; article not properly attributed. Fails WP:ATT and WP:NOTE. Wikipedia is for things that have already been noticed by multiple reliable sources; it's not for getting notice in the first place. --Charlene 09:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as NN, fails WP:ATT. Like many other student newspapers, this one is worthy at best of a sentence or two in the main article. As per AZ's assertions, I somehow find Wikipedia a worthwhile place to visit despite its callous rejection of my own college newspaper, one from a university with much larger enrollment than UWYO and for which I was an editor back in the day. Wikipedia's policies do not, in so far as I have been able to find, make any reference to "U Wyoming students might be offended" as grounds to keep an article. RGTraynor 17:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wyoming-related deletions. -- CosmicPenguin (Talk) 00:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
• Merge with ((University of Wyoming)) this information is worthy of a short paragraph in the university of Wyoming article but not an article of its own Irate velociraptor 06:21, 20 March 2007 (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.