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 debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 03:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see no factual reason for keeping this, but I am unsure if it would pass under CSD G1. Ian¹³_ID:540053 15:42, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• BJAODN this (gotta love the illustration), and bogovers. --King of All the Franks 15:43, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• What exactly is CSD G1 and why do you people keep trying to delete my article, which, believe it or not, is completely factual. Some little kid in Bulgaria doing a school report on Beer bogganing is cursing your names because you have denied him the knowledge he needs because of your overzealousness.
• First, it might behoove that little kid in Bulgaria to learn Canadian English first. Secondly, Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. --King of All the Franks 15:50, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Hello? Are you not hearing me? Beer bogganing is not "made up". It is an actual tradition. Know anyone between the ages of 13 and 22 who lives in southern Canada? Call them, and ask them. Maybe you'll take their word over mine. I find it offensive and rude that you would question something that I've posted in this manner.
  • Okay, we're talking about sledding and drinking at the same time. That's it, nothing else. It has no place in an encyclopedia. --King of All the Franks 16:01, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Another thing, look at these links: http://high-fructose-corn-syrup.blogspot.com/2005/12/beer-bogganing.html

  Just sledding and drinking at the same time? Isn't that a bit like saying that a lasagna is the same as eggs noodles and tomato sauce? By saying that, you're insulting a Canadian tradition. That's called racism. Had I posted anything so foul as what you have been saying about my beliefs and traditions in one of my articles, I'd have been banned.

  • But it's nothing more than a hobby. It has no notability outside of some small parts of rural Canada. --King of All the Franks 16:19, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • To be fair I've heard of it and I'm in England. Maybe not exactly matching the description in the article but something quite similar. However, I have no idea how notable it is so I won't be voting until I see more factual evidence about it's notablity but I think it is notable in some places. Englishrose 23:37, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. CSD G1 refers to a criteria for speedily deleting this article as being patently nonsense. (This is not a vote, just an explanation of the shorthand, which by the way, I think we should make an effort to avoid) Crunch 16:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless and until some citation is provided demonstrating the reality of this phenomenon, and the claims made about it. See Wikipedia:No original research for the grounds for this. "Ring up a Canadian teenager" doesn't count as a citation, incidentally. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:21, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is utter nonsense from start to finish, and keeping the article could open the floodgates for all sorts of teenage boys trying to get "hilarious" stories of drinking excess on Wiki. Drinking heavily on a bobsled is barely worth an aside. doktorb | words 16:35, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- but include with the bad jokes. --Christofurio 16:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete OFFENSIVE! Wikipedia is not here to promote or define destructive actions or decisions, no matter how traditional. krispymann25 12:06, 15 Jan. 2006 (EST).
• Delete - 60+ Google hits suggest that the term "beer bogganing" does exist. But the test for inclusion always comes down to Wikipedia:Verifiability: has it been documented in any reputable publication? No. Tearlach 18:02, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete nonsense. Not G1 candidate, but still WP:NFT. Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 18:48, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Can this be referenced in a sociological study of Canadian teenage practises? If so, can this be cited to demonstrate verifiability? If not, the article looks like original research.  (aeropagitica)  22:16, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - non-verifiable orignal research. Possibly move to BJAODN. --Hurricane111 23:09, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I will admit that I am the one who posted the article, and I had to create this second account because admin "Borg Queen" banned me because of what I guess she thought was my "overzealous" defence of the article. "Can this be referenced in a sociological study of Canadian teenage practises?" see http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=beer+bogganing I don't think you need much more proof. (And I did not create this second account out of any malicious intent, I merely want my point to be heard. The practice is verifiable, and I did not create the term. Nor is it "unimportant", any more so than enything else on Wikipedia, that is.)

  And- in response to Tearlach's earlier comment- "has it been documented in any reputable publication? No." I think you are forgetting that anti-elitism is one of the cornerstones of Wikipedia. If the only things in Wikipedia were things that had been documented in a "reputable publication", it would just be a lacklustre copy of the Encyclopedia Britannica. Wikipedia is about evolving and constantly changing. Everything has to start being "documented" somewhere, you know what I mean? In this way, your comment is fundamentally flawed in terms of Wikipedia's mission and goals.

  And krispymann? I'm sorry but your statement was very foolish. "OFFENSIVE! Wikipedia is not here to promote or define destructive actions or decisions, no matter how traditional. " Does this mean the extensive Wikipedia article on hanging promotes capital punishment?

  • Comment. The reference you've provided is to the Urban Dictionary, which describes itself as: "a slang dictionary with your definitions. Define your world." Frankly, you could have added this definition (are you in fact Greg Wester?); this isn't a good enough citation, especially as it seems to be the only one available.
    As for your new account, I've blocked it indefinitely; you may not create new accounts in order to evade editing blocks. If you think that the block is inappropriate or unfair, contact the person who blocked you or another admin. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:30, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • If your only answer to the question "Can this be referenced in a sociological study of Canadian teenage practises?" is to point to UrbanDictionary, whose mission is to take stuff that people simply make up, then your answer to the question is effectively "No.". As for your erroneous belief that Wikipedia should document things even if they are not documented elsewhere, I suggest looking at Wikipedia's actual mission and goals, starting with our Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research official policies. Uncle G 10:36, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• • Also note that the Urban Dictionary is not a reliable source. - Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 11:37, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. Delete it. Believe it or not, I'm not just some teenage vandal, I am not "Greg Wester", and I'm not trying to play some joke. No matter how many times I say it, it seems that people are intent on labeling me as some sort of no good vandal with no place in the high and lofty halls of Wikipedia. Screw you.

• Delete per WP:NFT. Stifle 23:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete nonsense. Incognito 03:54, 17 January 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.