Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gentlemen's Shaving Club

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 delete. --Celestianpower ^háblame 22:49, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Gentlemen's Shaving Club

As far as I can tell, the club is a group of friends with a name. Joyous (talk) 21:07, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

The orgainisation did indeed begin simply as a group of friends with a name, however, in the last year, the group has moved into the field of politics and is now rallying support and funds to run for the 2008 local elections in the Bromsgrove District. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.212.223 (talk • contribs) 14:17, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I thought i'd add my support for the retention of this article. Here at Oxford, we recognise that gentlemen's clubs are an eccentric yet delightful feature of the nation's social history, but not one that should be hermetically sealed in a museum display case. Nor indeed should it forever be associated with the upper classes. Since the inclusion of this article would represent both a recognition of a fine and very much living tradition, and also a strong endorsement of honourable friendship even amongst those without good breeding, such a move surely deserves approbation. I can submit that many of my fellow scholars feel much the same way. Coll. Magd. Oxon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.43.240 (talk • contribs) 14:37, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Indeed - and moreover, the Gentlemen's Shaving Club is not only notable for being a feature of the nation's social history, but for in itself being a profound socio-political experiment. In very few such groups in the UK are social classes and opinions so mixed. Nor, in fact, do they permeate so widely outside their original area of influence. As a social, cultural and political entity of renown, I promote retention. Coll. Sanc. Ioh. Bapt. Oxon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.62.115 (talk • contribs) 17:35, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as non-notable vanity - Just zis Guy, you know? 22:34, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, NN vanity .Devotchka 22:51, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. This AFD page was vandalized by 86.136.212.223 who changed the previous two votes (which I reverted). AFD vandalization makes me very suspicious of a page’s worthiness. ♠DanMS 02:06, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete I reverted vandal 86.136.212.223. Vanity in the raw.-Dakota 03:41, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Delete in then, but this day will remain forever in history as the day when Wikipedia deleted an entry about a future Prime Minister —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.212.223 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

• • Which will be recreated for all the right reasons when he becomes the Prime Minister. Saberwyn

Well done for saying "when" and not "if" - chuckle chuckle. I'm oooooonly playing

• My goodness, you guys have quite a high opinion of yourselves. Hilarious. Thanks for the heads up, by the way, DanMS. Devotchka 02:26, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Vanity pages are teh suck. Jachin 05:09, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

And you appear to have a limited sense of humour. However I still love you, in the same way I love all of humanity.

• I can't speak for the tohers, but I have a highly developed sense of humour. Take your article to Uncyclopaedia where it will be welcome. - Just zis Guy, you know? 08:18, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Nah, Uncyclopedia only wants things that are actually funny. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 12:12, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Oh, I think it's pretty funny. I had no idea people like this still existed outside of Woodhouse books! Devotchka 15:59, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
      • The main difference is, Woodhouse was satirising people who really acted that way. This lot are just playing silly buggers and consciously trying to be amusing, with mixed success. - Just zis Guy, you know? 17:03, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
        • Good point, old bean. Devotchka 20:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, unverifiable, vanity. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 12:12, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm almost tempted to write an article about the comedy club at my old university - they called themselves the Pig Fondlers' Guild. - Just zis Guy, you know? 17:04, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - Clearly an inside joke. If any of these people ever make anything of themselves, we can consider it for re-inclusion.Geoff NoNick 16:46, 4 November 2005 (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.