Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theophilus Athenaeum

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. Sango123 00:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Theophilus Athenaeum

Not Notable, inherently unverifiable. A secret student society at Baylor, supposedly founded by a semi-famous editor in 1898. --Brianyoumans 07:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

• Weak delete - a stronger one if the journal and its attendant controversies actually prove non-notable. Currently that article redirects to this one, which makes the "waves of controversy" claim iffy at best. BigHaz 07:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Student organizations that exist at only a single school are generally non-notable. From what is verifiable, this is a student organization which publishes a journal, whose name was taken from another journal published in the same city more than 100 years before. Allegedly this organization existed throughout the entire century but secretly and thus unverifiably. However, the verifiable history of this organization dates back only to 2004. As a semi-secret society whose members go by pseudonyms, this organization is unlikely to generate much verifiable content to support its notability. --Metropolitan90 08:43, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. The only documented proof of this group is in the Baylor student newspaper, and even in the article written about them, it is fairly obvious that they started in 2004. The history presented here is unverifiable. At the very most, I would support a one sentence mention in the William Cowper Brann article stating that a group started in 2004 at Baylor University claiming to be an offshoot of his ideals. I think they already added themselves into that article, but they are still caliming to be a 100+ year old society that just happened to surface in 2004. Cjosefy 13:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
• Duh. I feel compelled to point out that the nature of a secret society is one which is not specifically verifiable. There is a Wiki article on the Knights Templar, yet I have heard of no concrete records that document the Templars' existence. Besides, this entire encyclopedia is the backwoods of all things accurate. Do we really need to point out that this organization is non-notable? This encyclopedia was made by the public, for the public. Let's not act like we're intellectuals, alright?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.62.35.50 (talk • contribs)
  • Isn't it still summer at Baylor? Are people really back in school? Cjosefy 18:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
  • To dignify the anonymous comment with an answer: if you look at Knights Templar, the article is primarily about the actual non-secret Crusader military order, with a brief mention at the bottom about various organizations which claim secret descent from it. I think a secret organization could be notable, and if sufficient documents and former members surfaced, the history of the organization would be verifiable; however, at present neither of these states exist for Theophilus Athenaeum. --Brianyoumans 19:03, 7 August 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.