Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skull and Bones and U.S. Education

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 of the nomination was delete. Sango123 17:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Like Skull and Bones historical connections (afd1 afd2), this article consists primarily of original research and largely unsourced speculations on the involvement of Skull and Bones in a vast global conspiracy to control American education. The primary author is AWOL, and nobody seems to have taken on the (massive) task of sourcing the article's statements. Zetawoof^(ζ) 02:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete POV Pictures presents Attack Of The 100 Kilobyte Article! (In UNSOURCEDOVISION) Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. --IslaySolomon 02:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep Blimey for a secret society there is an awful lot known about them !!!! Needs a major major tidy and shortening, if this doesn't happen it will have to change to Delete DavidHumphreys ^{SPEAK TO ME}ABOUT _{THE THINGS I MESSED UP} 12:01, 31 August 2025 UTC [refresh]
• Delete Die, Attack of the Unsourced Skull and Bones Monster Articles, Die!!! ~ trialsanderrors 02:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete conspiracycruft. JChap 02:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as original research. Good material for a personal site, but this isn't an encyclopedia article. William Pietri 03:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as massive failure of Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 04:14, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, not enough citations, is apparently original work per above. At least it's shorter than the last S&B AfD. HumbleGod 04:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per other Skull and Bones page, arguments apply to this one too I suppose except the operatic length of the other one. SM247^{My Talk} 06:12, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOR --Satori Son 07:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete OR, cruft and quite likely complete bollocks Just zis Guy you know? 10:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Tom Harrison ^Talk 13:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as WP:NOR uncited conspiracruft. --DarkAudit 15:05, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Augh! They're onto us! Delete this exposé of the truth of our nefarious plot to forge a New World Order from our silly little fraternity! Do you not realise that the only reason the original editor has abandoned the article is because we had him spirited away to our prison camp on the moon in a black helicopter? Delete this article now, or the same will happen to you! — An Evil Yale Conspirator (not) 17:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOR -- Alias Flood 21:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOR and WP:SOAP and because the Illuminati want this kept secret. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per the secret Wikipedia cabal of Skull and Bones members which Haeleth and I are a part of. Seriously though, this is the same pile of POV junk this editor has pushed elsewhere. This person certainly doesn't skimp on content, though... Grandmasterka 06:52, 8 July 2006 (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.