Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Napoleon Club

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. Deathphoenix ʕ 04:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Napoleon Club

Napoleon Club (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Asserts notability but fails WP:V Otto4711 13:40, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - per nom: fairly notable if the claims are true, but nothing to back them up. Jayden54 14:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and mark as stub - article sounds notable, but due to the fact that it is not a part of recent history it is difficult to find online sources for it. Editors should get a chance to improve it. Tarinth 16:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - the burden of evidence is on those wishing to include it. I'm slightly dubious as to whether any detailed enough sources will be found but, if they are, it can be recreated then. Trebor 16:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• The purpose of a stub, which it can be marked as, is to give editors an opportunity to come along and supply more information. Tarinth 16:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• But one definition of a stub is "an article so incomplete that an editor who knows little or nothing about the topic could improve its content after a superficial Web search or a few minutes in a reference library". I don't think that applies here; if sources exist, they don't appear to be easily accessible. The article can't be kept in its current state (is there anything to prove this even existed?) because it's completely unverified. Trebor 17:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete without prejudice against recreation if sources confirming the club's notability are found. The article's only a few sentences long, so it wouldn't be hard to recreate; at this point, it's unreferenced and (as a result) not worth keeping. -- Kicking222 21:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Keep only if something notable happened there. Otherwise, it's just another defunct club. 05:18, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Delete (with evidence). I went around looking for sources, and it does in fact exist. It in itself is not notable there, no evidence of anything special occuring. It's the second-olest gay club in Boston, but that's all I could find, and nothing to even confirm that statement. --Wizardman 06:08, 9 January 2007 (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.