Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Team THRUST: Difference between revisions

Team_THRUST

This is a vanity page for a group of students. Yes, they have won awards, but the same could be said about groups in any high school in the country. Johnbrownsbody 01:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

• 'Delete per nom. Cain Mosni 01:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom.UberCryxic 01:24, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• NO....This team is one of a kind. In 2005, they were the only team in the United States to use monocoque. The article will become more involved and go into more detail later on, but I am new to Wiki and editing it. Respectfully, I know you have a job to do and I know wikipedia would run out of hard drive space in a very short time if you let everything stay, but please do not delete this article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lightingdude1989 (talk • contribs) 01:30, Oct 04, 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment You need to read up on vanity pages. Cain Mosni 01:37, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete student vanity. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 01:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Oh look. A VANITY ARTICLE about Andrew Lenahan. What else could this be called. If my page goes, i'm sorry but yours does too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lightingdude1989 (talk • contribs)

This is not an article about a single person, it is an organization....perhaps you would like to delete the Microsoft article too. With all do respect, get over yourselves and leave the article here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.244.8.117 (talk • contribs)

• Strong Delete - NN club. Could be speedied under CSD-A7. Torinir _{( Ding my phone My support calls E-Support Options )} 02:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment 1) The Andrew Lenahan page is a user page. When you click on the page, it clearly says User:Starblind, indicating such. Users are allowed to have a page pertaining to their Wikipedia edits in Wikipedia. 2) I realize that the nomination was very poor in spelling this out, but there are many policies and guidelines regarding Wikipedia, even though to allow access to the greatest number you can start editing without reading them (however, don't be surprised when somebody reverses your edits if they do violate policy). WP:VAIN is a guideline for people writing about themselves on Wikipedia. In general, the answer is "please don't", as you are not an neutral source about yourself (you will naturally bias things towards yourself, no matter how neutral you claim you are.). In fact, the issue isn't about hard disk space, as most deleted material is in the database, just not accessible to the general public. The problem here is the neutral point of view policy, which is the central tenet of Wikipedia. Because neutrality is so important, we require verification of information in articles by third-party reliable sources such as newspapers and magazines (that's the difference between Microsoft and your team). None of the information in the article is verified, therefore it cannot stay. If you can find articles about this team, feel free to contribute them. ColourBurst 03:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. MER-C 03:03, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete it's nice when vandals make it easy. Danny Lilithborne 06:09, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, non-notable club vanity. JIP | Talk 09:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• KEEP NOW KEEP KEEP KEEP If I were a vandal this would be ok but I am NOT so keep the page. Enough said. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.67.96.38 (talk • contribs)
  • Comment I've heard some nonsense argument but this takes the cake. Keep it 'cause you're not a vandal? Makes perfect sense. Danny Lilithborne 18:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete The arguments being made to keep this article seems to be straight out of WP:ILIKEIT. NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 17:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per everyone above. -- Kicking222 17:40, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per all the delete reasons above, fully agree - QuiteUnusual 18:55, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

This is a FREE Country - If you don't like it, don't look at it. This is giving information not only on Team 1501, but on Monocoque Design. If you are going to delete it, go ahead and delete it right now. There is no reason to continue arguing over this article. We need to not act like children here. If you can't give people a freakin' chance to get something here. Don't say THAT ANYONE CAN EDIT on the Wikipedia home page. End of Topic - LightingDude1989!

"This" is no one single country. Contrary to what you might think, countries outside the USA not only exist, but have people who edit Wikipedia. Me, for one. JIP | Talk 05:28, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

• Eh While the generality of the article does not help it out any, I am a member of this team and I have to agree with lightingdude that I would like to see it stay. As I think it needs much editing, I see the point lightingdude is trying to make. We are a good team, however, I can also see the point the Wikipedia editors are trying to make. This is basically a vanity article about a FIRST team. After doing some research I haven't found any other articles about other FIRST teams, although a nice section of Wikipedia to do so would be a great contribution to FIRST (For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology). Lightingdude, I like the thought, but I am afraid Wikipedia cannot keep the article...At least we have a great team website. :-) -croutzahn 16:23, 4 October, 2006

• Delete No notability, only verification is organisation's own website, "team THRUST" gets fewer than 600 google hits[1], some for other organisations of the same name. Sorry, LightningDude, but you've not understood WP policy: this isn't myspace. Cheers, Sam Clark 22:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment There already exists an article on Monocoque. Since you probably are well informed about Monocoque design, perhaps you can help improve it. - CosmicPenguin (Talk) 22:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

• Comment I think you misunderstand the meaning of "anyone can edit". It doesn't mean "anyone can place anything they want in any article" (and don't bring up the U.S. constitution; Wikipedia is not a governmental entity, so that document doesn't apply.); there are still policies and guidelines regarding content in place to keep the quality of Wikipedia high. Original research is one of them and requires independent third-party verification, such as newspapers and magazines. I've actually found some other articles about FIRST teams (Northern Force, Team 172, Maine FIRST Robotics Coalition), though because they also lack third-party verification they'll be subjected to the same deletion process. ColourBurst 23:10, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. There's even a discussion on this? Vanity, makes no claim of notability, other than winning a regional award, of which I'm sure there (at least) tens of thousands every year. eaolson 23:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. If you all want a vanity page for your group, buy a domain and host your own website. Resolute 04:36, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete this vanity page about a non-notable team. --Mnemeson 11:38, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. I am also a member of this team. We are unique in many ways, but another unique quality about us is the fact that we are one of the first, if not THE first, robotics teams that have been integrated as a part of 4H. Not much information has been posted about this yet, because it is a new page, but I know that it will in the future. We have tons of information we can give about this, please keep this page. 08:12, 5 October 2006

If you can find reliable, independent sources making this claim of notability for your team, then you could be in business. Otherwise, this doesn't address the concerns above. Sam Clark 14:26, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Clarification This article was meant to be updated at a later date, getting it up online quickly. The person on the team who made the above comment is correct...please keep this page as we will have reliable information eventually. As for the comment Resoluge made, we do have our own webpage if you would have been paying attention to the article you would have seen http://www.huntingtonrobotics.org. Nice work KH...Thanks for the post. --signed LightingDude1989. 16:55, 5 October 2006.

Opinion As a member of this team and the student president, along with the webmaster, i can see the points for NOT deleting i, but i can also see the points for deleting it. If you need proof of the 4-H issue i can get that provided by the 4-H Office here in our county. As far as monocoque goes we are the first team to ever make a robot using true monocoque and not something simular. Not to mention our whole robot is monocoque. I was thinking if this article is such a big deal, could we just add information about us to Hungtington, IN page and the Monocoque page? Obviously many people want to see this on here and many don't and some are split between, they want to see it here but not as a single page by itself. --signed roboticsguy1988. 17:35, 5 October 2006.

Comment I also should add that as this teams webmaster i can update this as i do with the website, that is not a problem, i just need to know if this is going to be solved or we are going to keep going back and forth. --signed roboticsguy1988. 17:41, 5 October 2006.

• Delete Non-notable high school club. (To answer the above, these discussions run no more than five days. At this point I suspect the outcome is pretty sure. The only arguments for keeping seem to be from your high school, and not in line with Wikipedia guidelines.) Fan-1967 21:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Correction Actually, FAN-1967, you are WRONG about these only being from Huntington North High School. I am from Atlanta, but I still have a great respect for this team. I would appreciate it if you get your facts straight before you say things. --Signed lightingdude1989 17:53, 5 October 2006

Comment FAN-1967, first of all it takes a while for pages to be found, second of all, it seems its wikipedia members who are coming in here. Now don't get me wrong but it seems we should give the public a chance to decide for themselves. As i stated above i can go BOTH ways. I guess i would like to see this team somewhere on Wikipedia, wether (as i also stated above)it is on our towns page, or the monocoque page. ~roboticsguy1988 18:00, 5 October 2006

Comment 2 I personally think that all the teams in FIRST should have a sub page, you wouldn't believe the amount of research other teams do, and wikipedia is a great source for information, so why not make it a great source for FIRST Team Information also. ~roboticsguy1988 18:00, 5 October 2006