Wikipedia:Articles for deletion//b/tard

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 Redirect to 4chan. Yuser31415 05:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

/b/tard

WP:NN, citing sources, WP:AD, among other things. Mitch 22:31, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; violates WP:CIVIL, plus WP:NONSENSE --Mhking 22:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; but can someone fix the above link? It can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//b/tard....
Forgot to sign. But on a related note, you might find this in ED, and I would link it if WP didn't ban it. Mitch 22:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and fix'd.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:45, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, merge or keep as there is a resource that mentions /b/tards that is used in 4chan. I will link to it in the article.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or Keep; the article is an actual classification of 4chan's inhabitant's. however, i don't think it deserves its own article. merge it into its own section on the wikipedia entry on 4chan --Buttons 22:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, possibly redirect to 4chan. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 23:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with 4chan. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:46, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or Redirect to 4chan. Metrackle 23:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Redirect to 4chan. OR, really, and there's no way around it. There's nothing that can be put here that can't be put in 4chan. While not all /b/tards ARE 4channers, the majority are. --W o o ty Woot? contribs 00:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Redirect I don't think it's owrth merging. JuJube 01:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect to 4chan ~~per WP:CIVIL~~ per WP:NEO and Jayden54. The term requires its own notability to justify including it here, and I don't believe that the single newspaper article establishes it. You could bring over material from the 4chan article to establish notability, but then the need for a separate entry seems eliminated. EdJohnston 03:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or delete per WP:NEO and generally no indication whatsoever that the name is used outside of this community. By the way, I might be missing something but I really don't see what WP:CIVIL has to do with this debate. Pascal.Tesson 03:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to 4chan. --- RockMFR 03:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Per all of the delete as violations of WP:OR and WP:RS (what WP:CIVIL has to do with all of this is unknown), I did add cite a reference that shows the usage of the term "/b/tard" outside of 4chan (somewhat) that being the news report that Hal Turner's website suffered a DDoS attack by individuals who called themselves /b/tards.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply That's great, but the article itself only says "people who identified as /b/tards" not "4chan == /b/tards, or 7chan == /b/tards" etc. I think there's room for OR here but sorry, no go. --W o o ty Woot? contribs 18:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect - with 4chan, where this description belongs. Definitely doesn't need its own article. Jayden54 17:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 4chan - The article was originally a redirect, and most of the information in this article is already in the 4chan article. I don't think a merge is necessary. --Transfinite 18:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Kill it with fire as the /b/tard expression goes. Anomo 05:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with 4chan ~ IICATSII punch the keys 11:57, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with 4chan ::mikm t 01:10, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article is extremely noteworthy and should be kept. lol j/k — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.252.124 (talk • contribs) 02:15, January 17, 2007
Redirect it to 4chan, per Transfinite-DE SU 10:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to 4chan as the article is well written and accurate but not noteworthy on its own. The section in the 4chan article should make it clear however that there are /b/tards who lurk mainly on 7chan or other imageboards. --Einsidler 10:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect (possibly a protected redirect) to 4chan. The information in this article either belongs in the 4chan article, or is already in there. _{Doc Sigma} ^{(wait, what?)} 14:02, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with 4chan. Korinkami 19:16, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge if sources can be found, else Delete. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 01:28, 19 January 2007 (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.