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. Stifle (talk) 08:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brewno[edit]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: ((subst:spa|username)); suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)); accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)).

Brewno (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

An article about a drinking game that has been deleted twice (and prodded again). The rationale is that this is a non notable game with no sources provided thus failing WP:V and WP:N. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 08:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - the only mentions of this I can find in Google are in a few blogs, forums, and websites with user-submitted content. These are not reliable sources (and descriptions of the game vary between them anyway), therefore the info is unverifiable and the article should be deleted. Somno (talk) 10:31, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete non-notable drinking game. the external links section (which I can only assume is supposed to be a stand in for references) doesn't even really lend any verifiability. Jasynnash2 (talk) 11:40, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination (disclosure: I believe I was the person who nominated it for deletion both previous times, and had prodded it again). I don't think it's necessary yet, but if the article continues to be re-recreated, salting should be considered.  -- BeezHive (talk|contribs) 12:53, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete junk. JuJube (talk) 03:38, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- This article should stay. There are several mentions of this game on the internet. The fact that there are not many major references to this game in either popular culture or academia is not a direct indicator of it's level of notability. Due to the inherit nature of a drinking game (the environment, and behaviors connected therein), notability, under the personal definitions of those who wish to remove this entry is impossible. It is obvious why most of the places where you would find a drinking game are on a user-submitted basis, because like ALL drinking games they are made up mostly by a small group of people, and spread through word of mouth. If you would rather, view it in a anthropological sense as to the spread of, and favoritism to drinking games within the context of spoken word in the unique setting of college towns. Although if I cannot sway your opinion to the side of keeping this game due to notability then I urge you to delete EVERY drinking game article be removed, because with the exception of the historical references to drinking games as to their invention, all of the latter content and pages therein should be removed. For instance, Fuck the Dealer, Beer pong, and a very similar game to which this game was most likely developed from Pyramid(which only has one reference to another drinking game website). I don't know why this game has exception to these other pages, but if you feel it necessary to delete this page, for a reason that I believe is hypocritical, then you should remove all the other articles as well. Gumbyfly00-- — Gumbyfly00 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. 71.228.73.181 (talk) 03:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In accordance with WP:IAR I second the above contributor's motion to delete all articles about specific drinking games (especially those which conflict with not a game guide) like this one and propose that only those REALLY REALLY notable ones are included in short form within one article on the topic. Jasynnash2 (talk) 10:45, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: While I agree, that should be done as a separate AFD. This AFD is about the Brewno article - the notability of the other articles isn't really relevant.  -- BeezHive (talk|contribs) 12:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

" I have heard of this game multiple times through friends and family, but we were never able develop an accurate source of rules. I found these rules to be accurate with what I originally learned. I believe the article is very informative and should not be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.227.201.166 (talk) 16:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC) — 128.227.201.166 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

• Keep-I have been playing this game for about twenty years now and is very well known throughout my town. I highly recommend you keep this article. Surprisingly the rules here are exactly the way we all play it, however I have heard of a few variations, however this is the original version.Condor85 (talk) 23:20, 12 September 2008 (UTC)— Condor85 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Delete in its current form. Will reconsider if reliable sources establishing notability are added. Nuttah (talk) 08:31, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - When did it become proper and acceptable behavior to delete material because you haven't heard of it or seen it? I have personally seen this game being played on the following campuses: Emory University, Georgia Tech, University of Florida, University of South Florida, Florida State University, University of North Florida. The original purpose of Wikipedia was to provide information on every imaginable topic to individuals with no charge. The only items that were to be deleted are the items that are obviously incorrect or false. As no one proposing to delete this article has actually managed to prove it's illegitimacy (other than the fact that they've never played it), perhaps they should instead try playing the game instead of jerking off to their own supposed Wikisuperiority. P.S. When I read the phrase "I don't think it's necessary yet, but if the article continues to be re-recreated, salting should be considered," the word wanker immediately came to mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.136.36.27 (talk • contribs) 18:15, September 14, 2008 — 24.136.36.27 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Please feel free to read WP:CIVIL as soon as possible. You may also wish to have a look at the policies and guidelines around notability, verifiability, and reliable sources as well as the various helpful pages on what arguments to avoid at this particular venue. Your comments do not seem to be based in policy in anyway and you do Wikipedia and yourself a disservice with them. Jasynnash2 (talk) 08:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - The main reason why mostly any subject can be found in Wikipedia is because anyone who has knowledge of it can bring it to the encyclopedia. Which is what makes Wikipedia a place to search the topics that would NOT be found on google yet, or academic sources. Brewno is actually a game that is rapidly growing in many college campuses, for those of you who haven’t been in college in the past 5 years. If this article is deleted, Wikipedia would be failing to serve one of it’s main purposes. It would not be the leader provider of information that’s relevant to cultural and social issues, not just our textbooks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.238.166.157 (talk) 17:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC) — 64.238.166.157 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Comment: Actually, Wikipedia requires verifiable sources for articles. If Brewno does not appear in such sources, we cannot establish its notability, and it should not be included in Wikipedia.  -- BeezHive (talk|contribs) 17:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:Here are just a few-
*http://www.realbeer.com/fun/games/games-243.php
*http://www.idrink.com/displaygame.html?gamename=fuckyou
*http://www.powerhourvx.com/free_games_online_games_free_online_games_play_addicting_poker_fun_cards/fuck_you_cards_drinking_games.htm
*http://www.barmeister.com/games/by_category/2/

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.228.73.181 (talk) 02:35, 15 September 2008 — 71.228.73.181 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Thanks, but none of those are reliable sources for Wikipedia articles. Somno (talk) 00:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.