Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thugism

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. - Mailer Diablo 07:49, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The subject of the article is a "new religious movement" based on the life of Tupac Shakur. Many of the elements of the article are quite famous—the rapper, his thug life philosophy, thug mansion (one of his songs), etc. However, I believe this religious movement falls under not for things made up in school one day; or at least is unverifiable. 25 unique Google hits for "thugism "tupac shakur"" [1], none of which, as far as I can tell, use the word thugism in the manner in which it is defined in this article. Some of the text screams hoax to me as well, but dubious claims are de rigeur for religions. Prod removed.--Fuhghettaboutit 22:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. It is all original research that cannot be proven. It is also about a non-existent religion. guitarhero777777 22:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete total nonsense: one of the rules is "Imbibe Kool Aid often." and they apparently consider Edwin Perkins, inventer of Kool-Aid to be God. Might make a good redirect to Thuggee after deletion, though. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. Fopkins | Talk 23:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Took me a while to dig up, but here [2] is a thing a guy I knew wrote up about "Thugism". It's a fairly new thing, I guess. If nothing else it's interesting and amusing. ~Nightmare Link (p.s. hopefully I did this right, I'm really new to wikipedia)
• Delete "a thing a guy I knew wrote up?" That just screams notable. --Xrblsnggt 02:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as nonsense and redirect per Starblind. Gazpacho 05:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep "It is all original research that cannot be proven" "Delete total nonsense" I believe that religion doesnt need factual basis, theres nothing to prove, as Its based on faith and beliefs alone. Therefore, Thugism should be kept. ~B0b Jones

Comment We aren't debating whether the tenets of the religion are true, but whether the existence of the religion is true. If the former was the gravaman of the deletion nomination I'd probably be stoned to death.--Fuhghettaboutit 03:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete "Bros before hoes"? Hmm. Baseball,Baby! ^{balls•strikes} 03:04, 18 August 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.