Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peg boy

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep (no consensus). For those interested in vote count there were 5 delete, 3 keep, and with no comments which sway me away from the "two-thirds" guideline, this article defaults to keep. There is however a concern about the verifiability of the subject, so it may appear on VFD again unless better sources are provided. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:50, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Peg boy

Vandalism, surely Al 14:52, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

• It appears to be semi-genuine [1] [2]. That is, it is a slang dicdef of a boy prostitute, who indeed were forced to sit on pegs (if it isn't an urban legend of course). Quite what this has to do with the Royal Navy however, is beyond me. But I vote delete as a dicdef. A suitable article would go under a more grown up name such as child prostitution. Dunc|☺ 16:28, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
• It is a dicdef currently, but this could certainly developed into a proper article if it's legit as the above links suggest. For example, to what extent was the idea of a pegboy known about or tolerated by the Navy? Did they really sit on pegs or was this a legend? Beyond the scope of a dictionary entry, but fair game for an encyclopaedia. Definite keep from me. Agentsoo 17:41, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per Agentsoo. I've put cleanup and accuracy tags on the article (that's appropriate while it's on VfD, right?) but this is an encyclopedic subject and should be covered and linked from other articles. -EDM 19:42, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
• weak keep as a notable urban legend, at least. The article itself needs work badly. Brighterorange 19:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete unless verified. If we can't tell if it's an urban legend or not, we shouldn't have an article on it. --Carnildo 20:17, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete; this is almost certaintly an urban legend, which gained new popularity when Dan Savage wrote a column on it. Unless there is a good independent reference, nix it. Sdedeo 20:21, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete The two references provided above are entirely non-authoritative, I'm afraid. Lacking any evidence for this, it's gotta go. -Splash 23:53, 5 August 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.