Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Royal Eagle

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. W.marsh 00:45, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Royal Eagle

Hoax society - see talk:Royal Eagle. If the author manages to get the University to list it, the the deletion grounds become non-notable student society. -- RHaworth 17:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Hoax. No Guru 17:55, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, not WP:V.--Isotope23 18:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Unverifiable, and non-notable anyway. — TheKMan^talk 18:41, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete It's well written etc. but this part makes me suspicious: "less-than-dignifying "humper" of love". James Kendall 18:45, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete hoax and non-notable per nomination Avi 20:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, hoax. Royboycrashfan 20:28, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as above - see also Adelaide University Engineering Society.Blnguyen 23:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. As the article itself says, it is a chauvinistic student society with no measurable impact on the world at large. No doubt concocted somewhere between the fourth and sixth drink during a Friday night sometime in November (of an unremarkably bad year) by people whose academic achievements are limited to how many courses they can fail simultaneously and how obnoxiously drunk they can be and still retain their 40-point IQs. --Agamemnon2 08:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • After receiving (and replying to) a rather sarcastic message from a spokesman of said organization, I retract my vote to avoid impartial voting from taking place. --Agamemnon2 07:16, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Bravo I just wish they would let me in...
• Delete, per nom. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 01:41, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Neither notable nor verifiable. --Srleffler 01:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete . No proof that this group really exists. If we do find source(s), article should be limited to facts that can be sourced, otherwise I could add that "all members must be less than three feet tall" and assert that I have inside knowledge that this is true. If we are unable to substantiate anyting other than its existence, then simply delete and list the society on Secret society article. MPS 02:03, 11 February 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.