Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Run your boy

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 Deleted as unsourced gamecruft, Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information. (aeropagitica) 22:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Run your boy

Run your boy (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Non-notable gamecruft. Wikipedia is not a how-to site, not for things made up in school (or over the Internet) one day. Prod-warning added by Wafulz was removed by anon. Riana 13:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. This is demonstrably a game-guide/how-to-guide. Wikipedia's not for those. Serpent's Choice 14:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. Koweja 14:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as a game guide—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Koweja (talk • contribs) 14:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC).
• Delete: I'm not sure whether run ur boy is made up in Internet one day or a widespread strategy in the game, but the topic is simply too specialised to warrant its inclusion. —Goh wz 14:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete - WP:Complete Bollocks The Kinslayer 14:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete; not a game guide because it does not say how-to, but it also doesn't say anything worth keeping. — brighterorange (talk) 15:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • It's been considerably altered since I nominated it. riana_dzasta 18:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Doesn't make a difference, except now it sounds self-promotional as well. The Kinslayer 19:28, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. I would say merge into the game's article, but it's so poorly done it's worth a delete. Lemmy12 20:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• im in ur wikipedia deletin ur articlez Danny Lilithborne 21:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete tactic in one very obscure internet game. WP:NOT a game guide applies nicely here. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as prodder. No reliable sources=no article. --Wafulz 00:47, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Posted on talk page by Hawkki.
• "Why delete!? This is almost as big a thing as All Your Base.. and it has a page in wiki !!! Why can not this get a page? Forget about deleting."
  • To address this: AYB has numerous references in popular culture and citations- far more than this article. They key is verifiable material. --Wafulz 00:47, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Verifiable? So how widespread must the meme be before it is accepted? 10 users recognizing it? 100? 1000? 1000000? You cannot draw such "lines in the water". You must have something concrete. So many times have i seen people ask what someone meant with "run your boy", and thats why i initially created the wiki article. Fortunately, someone who actualy CAN write in english has reformatted it, so it looks professional. And meets all standards of a article in wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hawkki (talk • contribs) 01:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC).
  • Verifiable means there are reliable sources written about it. It has exactly nothing to do with how many people have heard of it- like you said yourself, it has to be concrete. And it meets none of the standards of a Wikipedia article- it needs verifiability, no original research, and must have a neutral point of view. Since it has no independent publishings about it, it is effectively original research and inherently non-neutral. --Wafulz 01:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Doesn't even fall into game guide category as there's no "guide", so it passes the Fails everything test. SkierRMH,02:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete I'm a fan of Spring but this is silly. This isn't notable outside of a small group based around a game. If this was some huge internet fad that got started in Spring, maybe, but it simply fails a large number of notability and importance guidelines. Ryan Magley 05:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, per nom. --MegaBurn 08:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Sounds naughty. FirefoxMan 16:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Dont delete it, I vote not to delete it. It provides useful information, it just needs to be verified by sources.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.41.74.54 (talk • contribs).
  • The claim here is that there are no reliable sources, meaning if they are not provided, the article will be deleted. --Wafulz 16:39, 17 December 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.