Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Gamma Society

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 gamma sterilised (delete). Mailer Diablo 00:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Gamma Society

Was tagged for Speedy, then Prod'd, which was removed, so here it is. A secret society about which little is known and nothing can be verified shouldn't have an article. Smells like a hoax. —Wrathchild ^(talk) 13:34, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Sh. . . don't tell anyone. Just delete it secretly. Unverifiable and, as noted, could be a hoax. Logophile 13:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
• Kill it with Gamma Rays!...er, fire.--み使い Mitsukai 14:12, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:V and per Logophile do it quietly. As stated in the article: "TGS is said to have only sleeping members..." No need to wake them up.--Isotope23 14:14, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Of course, this just proves how powerful they really are. Thatcher131 14:37, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as unverifiable. --Terence Ong 15:05, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete It's so secret that even Google can't find it. Accurizer 15:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. feydey 17:54, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per all above. If their members are all asleep, at least they won't come in and sock the discussion. --Kinu ^t/_c 18:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
• Have you guys checked the sources? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.17.229.129 (talk • contribs) .

• Comment The book exists (ISBN 0760762767) but the on-line information does not mention this society. The web site is in Swedish. Accurizer 00:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
• The Swedish website is an encyclopedia which doesn't even appear to have an article on the topic: I keep coming up with Vasco da Gama and "Chamber Orchestra." No sale. Delete with prejudice. --KJPurscell 07:35, 2 March 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.