24 September 2009
| ||
|---|---|---|
| The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it. | ||
|
This deletion discussion is highly suspicious for a number of reasons. As indicated here, there is reason to believe that off-site canvassing on a secret mailing list may have affected the voting result. Even if these votes are counted, the closing of "Keep" hardly seems supportable (at best it was No Consensus). The closer, Pastor Theo, was later determined to be a sockpuppet of a banned user, further enhancing the aura of suspicion around this AFD. His closure seemed to be more of his own opinion than anything to do with what happened in the discussion itself. The discussion should be overturned and the article deleted because it is a clear violation of WP:SYNTH. Imagine if someone created an article called Corporate-owned Congressmen in the United States, and populated the article with statements about how Senator X took $Y in campaign contributions from corporation Z, and other sources saying how corporations have too much influence in the U.S. political process. That's basically the equivalent of what we have here. I am sure I could find reliable sources saying the above things, but it still wouldn't justify an article with that title. The same is true here — this article makes a highly inflammatory accusation and backs it up with a bunch of synthesized sources that don't come close to supporting what the title promises. Many of the sources are questionable (a book by Regnery Press, a far-right publishing house that shouldn't be cited for anything but the authors' opinions), and others (a TIME article from the 1980s) are taken out of context and offer a far more nuanced picture than the Wikipedia page indicates. Several sentences were directly plagiarized from that article, adding copyright issues to the other concerns here. *** Crotalus *** 14:43, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
| ||
| The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
| The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it. |
|
I feel that the page was deleted far too quickly - before I had chance to add any improvements/notability. Additionally, I think that the uncontested survival of Durham University Engineering Society merits the existence of BEAMES (which is essentially Bath University Engineering Society). Welshgolfer ( talk) 09:29, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
|
| The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
| The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it. |
|
I would like to thank the admin for taking time to discuss the matter of this article's deletion. However, I still think the deletion is uncalled for because the reasons upon which such deletion was based were not really established by those who pushed for its deletion. First thing that I noticed is the reason given that it exists only in a few law schools. That cannot be an acceptable reason because in fact, the fraternity was established to be exclusive in those specific schools. The purpose of keeping a minimal number of members would be defeated if the fraternity allows the recruitment of members from other law schools of below par performance. And also take into consideration the fact that the setting is in the Philippines where most law schools are in Manila. Second thing that I noticed is the attention given to the death that occurred in an initiation rites a decade ago. The case was a sensational one indeed, but I guess it should not be referred to as "their unusually violent initiation rites" because such incident was isolated and does not reflect the overall footing of the fraternity. They event went further by citing the news item on Davao CityMayor Rodrigo Duterte's "trauma of the beating he received during his initiation into this fraternity." Let me take note that the said incident was made a basis of a landmark Supreme Court decision wherein the Court took judicial notice of the youth's irresponsible acts. Last thing I noticed is about the notability. I remember that the admin also tried to have this article deleted a year ago, but I was able to prove the aspect of notability before the date of deletion. I respect the views of the admin in relation to the notability of a certain subject. However, I would like to point out that Lex Talionis is a Philippine-based fraternity which is notable especially among the legal professionals and members are already in high positions in the judiciary or in corporate practice. This time, I am asking the admin to consider the same reasons set forth in the previous deletion attempt and restore the article back into the pages of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Talion1 ( talk • contribs) 09:18, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
|
| The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it. |