Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Juggalo: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 05:55, 26 March 2006 editRetired username (talk | contribs)48,708 edits Closing debate; result was no consensus← Previous edit Revision as of 08:53, 3 September 2006 edit undo64.12.116.13 (talk) fix m. coding errorNext edit →
Line 9: Line 9:
unecessary article that could be added to the Insane Clown Posse page ] 02:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC) unecessary article that could be added to the Insane Clown Posse page ] 02:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


'''NN, POV''' Material is not notable, and appears to be a POV push against the subject, the band ]. Structural bias in article title, suggesting that ICP has an opinion regarding homosexuality, as well. ] 08:13, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''Does that mean you are going to mark every single album and fan page that is in Misplaced Pages that juggalos have set up? Go ahead and look through ICP's page and note that they have seperate articles for everything. Those should be deleted. But juggalos have taken off and become more than just losers whole follow ICP. That is the only reason I think the article should stay. But be cleaned up --pahsons 15:37, 17 March 2006 (UTC) {{unsigned|Pahsons|15:37, 17 March 2006}}
*'''Delete''', of course; I am the nominator. ] 08:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
*:It's a musical groups fanbase with zero social significance whatsoever add a blurb to the "ICP" page.]
*'''Comment''' This afd nomination was ]. Listing now. —] ] 22:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC) *'''Comment''' on further inquiry, article ] seems to be the worst creation of ]. ] 08:19, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Ban Kasreyn, Save the Article''', Hasn't Kasreyn vandalized the main ICP page?.--] 11:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Strong keep'''. Obnoxious as it may be, "juggalo" gets 911k Google hits, had recent mention inthe based on a recent violence situation, and is a common descriptor for fans of the ]. I'm sure someone with LexusNexus abilities could probably dig up more news articles based around the term. --] <small>(])</small> 23:16, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
* '''Why is this here?'''. Any claims on sexual preferences of the band belong on the band article (]), but ] has edited this addition and many others out, because it didn't coincide with his POV. ] 18:31, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' -- notable, if often disdained, quasihipster subculture. ] 04:21, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep it''' per nom. ] 19:57, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' -- Though strongly tied to the Insane Clown Posse, Juagglos have become a sub-culture that spans world wide and is not unknown. MJoe 08:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC) {{unsigned|Murdeorus Joe|08:19, 18 March 2006}}
*'''Keep it''' as above. <span style="background-color:#000000"><font color="white">(|--</font></span> <span style="background-color:#CCCCCC"><font color="red">'''UlT<font color="green">i<font color="blue">MuS'''</font></font></font> <sup>( ] | ] | ] | ] )</sup></span> 19:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' I'm seeing very strong support here; does anyone agree this is a case for a '''speedy delete'''? ] 22:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''What?''' Been hearing voices, Kasreyn? Aside from your numerous comments Kasreyn, I don't see much support of your POV.] 20:27, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' I wouldn't speedy delete this article. I disagee that this material is "unreliable"--I think it is notable, and not designed to bias the subject any more than it would be to say that Charles Nelson Reilly is gay. That said, I do believe that the structural bias does not exist, but its content should be merged with the main article. I think it's a biased attempt by fans of ICP to keep this information out of the main article, and that the creator of this article was taking a valid stand by creating it if ICP fans are putting their own POV in the article. ] 22:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
:*'''Comment''' I'm not sure on what grounds you can propose to delete this article, or a remove it from the main ICP article.--] 23:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
:*'''Comment''' It is that noteworthy and verified. The text makes a reference to an interview in a magazine. I have found the source of the material. The article lists four references which are quite relevant information and are only there to make the article more substantial. Personally, I am not a fan of the group or their style of music and do not care if the statements are true or false. I am just trying to preserve the integrity of the article. If you can show me one valid reason for deletion, then I would consider supporting removing this from wiki. --] 23:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Save it''' I personally verified these sources, and they all exceed expectations. Riviting stuff people. >] 01:46, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Hold on''' per all the lovely comments above. I don't think it's speedyible under wikipedian legislation at all. <sup>]</sup> 01:06, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Interesting''' It's interesting, and more than just POV since it's verifiably true. It might be worth briefly mentioning it in the main ICP article as well.--] 05:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Agreed''' per nom. ] 06:57, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' &mdash; unencyclop&aelig;dic subject that spawns an article that's a constant source of bickering and edit-warring. The only people editing it seem to be self-professed subjects of the article, so there's also a vanity aspect. --] (]) 19:10, 20 March 2006 (UTC) *'''Delete''' &mdash; unencyclop&aelig;dic subject that spawns an article that's a constant source of bickering and edit-warring. The only people editing it seem to be self-professed subjects of the article, so there's also a vanity aspect. --] (]) 19:10, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
*:'''Comment''' There are many articles that contain bickering, but that doesn't make it a reason for its deletion. The article is edited by more then Juggalos, i.e. Pahsons, thus is why there is bickering as the subject of Juggalo is obviously controveral. Not to mention there is in fact a social impact from Juggalos as politicians and people have put blame upon Juggalos and their music to juvenile delinquency and other social problems. Also Juggalos span all the way from America to palces such as Europe and Australia, thus I feel it's international notability is reason for it to be worthy of encyclopedia entry. Even sub-cultures such as punk and goth have an article, which are music group breed as well. MJoe 04:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC) ]
*'''Keep''' -- I can only speak from experience: a few minutes ago, I read a bulletin on Myspace.com which mentioned 'juggalos'. Having completely forgotten what the word meant, I entered it into the Google toolbar, and a Misplaced Pages article popped up like a beacon among the Juggalo Tattoos and the Juggalo Championsh!t Wrestling. Why take away such an illusion of authority? ] 07:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
*:In fact left by <span class="plainlinks">] (] &bull; ] &bull; &bull; ] &bull; )</span> 13:58, 25 March 2006. --] (]) 15:36, 25 March 2006 (UTC)




Revision as of 08:53, 3 September 2006

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 no consensus to delete, even taking into account improperly signed comments. W.marsh 05:55, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Juggalo

unecessary article that could be added to the Insane Clown Posse page Fyrre 02:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

NN, POV Material is not notable, and appears to be a POV push against the subject, the band Insane Clown Posse. Structural bias in article title, suggesting that ICP has an opinion regarding homosexuality, as well. Kasreyn 08:13, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Comment I'm not sure on what grounds you can propose to delete this article, or a remove it from the main ICP article.--Rosicrucian 23:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment It is that noteworthy and verified. The text makes a reference to an interview in a magazine. I have found the source of the material. The article lists four references which are quite relevant information and are only there to make the article more substantial. Personally, I am not a fan of the group or their style of music and do not care if the statements are true or false. I am just trying to preserve the integrity of the article. If you can show me one valid reason for deletion, then I would consider supporting removing this from wiki. --Koosh 23:18, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Save it I personally verified these sources, and they all exceed expectations. Riviting stuff people. >Riddlebox Wraithz 01:46, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Hold on per all the lovely comments above. I don't think it's speedyible under wikipedian legislation at all. 01:06, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Interesting It's interesting, and more than just POV since it's verifiably true. It might be worth briefly mentioning it in the main ICP article as well.--Wakefencer 05:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Agreed per nom. Postdlf 06:57, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete — unencyclopædic subject that spawns an article that's a constant source of bickering and edit-warring. The only people editing it seem to be self-professed subjects of the article, so there's also a vanity aspect. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 19:10, 20 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.