Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/October man sequence

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. W.marsh 23:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] October man sequence

October man sequence (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Not referenced or notable. A google search turns up only 72 hits, most of which are forums where people ask what it is or mention it in passing. Nonpareility 21:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - seems to be something in the pickup scene, but I can't find anything reliable about it, so non-notable and fails WP:V. Jayden54 21:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep As it is a verifiable part of the pickup scene. Sharkface217 22:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Can you provide any of these references and add them to the article? Jayden54 23:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Create intrigue for the desperate, and they'll come begging you to take their money. Xiner 22:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom; Wikipedia is not for things made up in the lockerroom one day. WP:V and "pickup scene" are like fish and bicycle. Angus McLellan (Talk) 23:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment This article would like to speak with you. -- Ben 23:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
    • It has ample sources from outwith said community. I don't see any similarity. Angus McLellan (Talk) 07:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
      • I'm sorry. You are right. I misunderstood your comment. And I do remember a joke about a fish needing a bicycle. -- Ben 17:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. This subject would be interesting to have an article on eventually, but right now it is just not notable for a stand-alone article on wikipedia (even though many people in the community know about it, and although there is verifiable info on the seduction community in general). Also, no verifiable sources are available so far. Worse, the article isn't written from a neutral point of view. For people interested in creating seduction community-related articles on wikipedia, see my user page for suggestions on how to do so without getting your articles deleted. --SecondSight 01:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as Sharkface217 mentioned, however at worst perhaps moving this article into another more general article would be a better idea. Mathmo ^Talk 09:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge with Seduction community(which itself has borderline verifiability issues); —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohnoitsjamie (talk • contribs) 05:48, 11 December 2006

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.