Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Satan Disciples

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. Yannismarou 08:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Satan Disciples

Satan Disciples (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

• Weak delete and rewrite: This article has a long history. It was speedy deleted in January because it looked like nonsense. It was recreated recently but was made up mostly of a quote from some book. Then it was tagged for speedy but declined (I was also going to decline it but then got nervous that it was nothing but copyvio anyway so I left it). Then it was changed to look like the same nonsense that was speedy deleted in January so it was tagged for speedy again! It's hard to tell if this is noteworthy because the article is in such terrible shape but I'll vote to delete since it needs a total rewrite. (I've restored the previously deleted history so everyone can see). —Wknight94 (talk) 16:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete While sources like this FBI press release and some related news articles suggest this is a significant Chicago gang, the article is just absolute unsourced crap. I have no reason to believe that the current authors have any intention of improving it. Still, as a decent article could be written, I am against salting the page (If that's ever suggested here). Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 18:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete as copyvio (tagged as such) per the URL provided. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 19:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC) reverted to non-copyvio (I hope?) version. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 19:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Strong delete I may have been a bit too hasty in tagging. this older revision does not appear to be a copyvio (at least not the page provided) I still stand by my original opinion though, changed to strong delete as this version of the page is even worse. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 19:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Delete Even in its current worked-over state, it's plainly and blatantly copied from here [1] ...Even if the main contributor is the autor of the piece from whence the Wiki version is copied, or had a release, the source itself makes a plea for sources on its main page [2]. When the SOURCE (sole source) isn't sourced and knows it... it's pretty much hopeless. Wysdom 18:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
• delete - unless someone can change my mind by referencing the Wikipedia notability guidelines for street gangs. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 23:44, 21 April 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.