Talk:Back Dorm Boys
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It is very important to independently source and cite the statement that the Blogger site has been "proven" to be a hoax. At the moment there is an indirect point within the text (not the appropriate way to verifiably source something on Wikipedia) to a blogger saying that he tracked an email from the author of the blog site and it was in Amsterdam - that doesn't "prove" anything, and the source is of questionable verifiability by my lights, given that this is an accusation of hoaxing, which is pretty strong. What do other editors think? I think it should be deleted until something a bit stronger can be sourced, or perhaps multiple blogger investigations with all evidence posted? NYDCSP 18:53, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
- Keep The William Sledd article was deleted because certain uninformed admins didn't understand what it was all about. He, too, was a youtuber. I believe that these backward admins will be the undoing for Wikipedia. Let's not delete this page. Wikipedia already has a bad name for its admin bullying. James Allen Starkloff 75.89.17.161 00:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep When i came to wikipedia, it showed me real information, actually it was the only information i could find on the back dorm boys. It was when i typed in "chinese boys" it redirected me to the "back dorm boys". without this page, id have no where to look for new information on the backdorm boys, if you delete the page, then ill just make a new one :D
[edit] keep!!!!!!!!!
Keep this page please, they are the only information I can find about them —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.75.229.195 (talk) 01:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC).