Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Tunnel Rats

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. See AfD talk for detailed rationale. JERRY talk contribs 03:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Tunnel Rats

The Tunnel Rats (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable group whose queries only reveal self web-site and a few small forum postings. Completely unsourced. The group also appears to be defunct. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 14:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete– Could find no information. Shoessss |  Chat  14:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I want to reserve my opinion until further developments are established. On my search, I could find no information. However, Jachin (talk) explanation would explain why. Shoessss |  Chat  16:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Very Strong Keep - Group has made front page news in Australia on numerous occasions and is currently in the media at present [1], [2], and are currently making representations to act in an advisory role with the Australian coroner in relation to recent deaths at Lurline Bay, New South Wales which will be further front page stuff. The group is Australia's largest urban exploration group, with over 2,000 members across the country. It is not defunct, but has had a media ban on for in excess of three years. Jachin (talk) 16:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I will strike if the following are met: (1) Notability is established with reliable sources. Saying that it has "2,000 members" may be impressive, but if there is next to nothing to exclaim that, then its pretty much useless; and (2) Some references are added. The notice has been up since March 2007, by which substantial amounts of unreferenced texts can be removed if no sources are found within a reasonable amount of time. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 17:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep group seems to be somewhat notable. Article could stand to be developed further, but should be kept. Sf46 (talk) 04:23, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - per nominator. No sources, no media, if it even exists at all it's a non-notable private club. Jpp42 (talk) 11:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 03:38, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Sting au Buzz Me... 04:08, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete No reliable sources and nothing comes up on Google so does not pass WP:N. The source listed above does not look like comprehensive coverage to me. --Nick Dowling (talk) 04:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - non notable. Perhaps the "sport" itself might warrant an article, assuming reliable sources can be found, but I see no reason to glorify this particular group or their activities, particularly given the flimsy media coverage (a link to some shock jock's website). Gatoclass (talk) 04:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • And while we're at it, I also recommend deleting Cave Clan, a similar group whose article also lacks credible sources. Gatoclass (talk) 04:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I did find a Sydney Morning Herald article [3] that mentions "urban explorers" but no mention of "The Tunnel Rats". You have to ask yourself (if being of an inclusionist mindset) if this topic can indeed become an article. Perhaps a name change and a search for appropriate content relative to the pursuit? Sting au Buzz Me... 04:23, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Comment Cave Clan is somewhat better known than this outfit (eg, I've heard of it) but an AfD might be justified. There's lots of urban exploration-cruft popping up on Wikipedia at the moment. --Nick Dowling (talk) 05:39, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • You mean delete, since that's what he voted for with reason? Seicer (talk) (contribs) 05:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment that would only be appropriate if The Tunnel Rats are a sub-organisation of Cave Clan. --Nick Dowling (talk) 07:56, 8 February 2008 (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.