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. - brenneman {L} 14:04, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Steak and Blowjob Day(Third nomination)[edit]

First AfD was full of sock/meat puppets and led to a no consensus. Same basic problem still stands. A day made up by one radio guy is not notable.JoshuaZ 00:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • If the content of a talk page were one of the criteria for deletion, Wikipedia would be far, far smaller than it is today. Raindog469 16:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The argument on the talk page is that the last AfD was closed early. Let's give this thing the full debate (puppets and all) so there will be no debate next time. Fan1967 03:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Then read the earlier AfD. It's pretty clear. Fan1967 03:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Comments on this AFD are essentially the only edits Raindog469 has ever made (contribs). -- RoySmith (talk) 02:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - having the article being #1 Google result for a search of the actual term is not much of an argument for keeping the article - if I made up a hoax article on "Give Confusing Manifestation Money Day" it would be number 1 in its search. More important would be things like - is it being covered in major media? Is there a chance of it getting included in some kind of official calendar? Does anyone notable publicly endorse it? If you can give strong positive answers to those, then you can put them in the article, and maybe make it saveable. Confusing Manifestation 13:27, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to Precedence, Radio Stations with a license are noteable, and can then also (in a weak fashion) be a major media outlet. Its not solid, of course, but it helps the articles case. Google Trends[1] show that it gets the same, if not more, hits than other 'similar' holidays. The chance of it showing on a calander is completely objective too, and shouldnt really be considered as an against point. Many day-to-day calanders have many random, interesting or inane facts on them, all produced by major print companies, and a day like this would fit right into one of those forms. The calander I use is made by a major publisher, and it doesnt have Hanaka listed, or many other major holidays, nor does it have many minor holidays. Trjn 15:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Trjn, while I'm a pretty strong supporter of this new holiday, the pirate one is called Talk like a pirate day and not "speak like a pirate day". The former dwarfs the various permutations of Steak and Blowjob Day on Google Trends, likely due to the necessity among those promoting Steak and Blowjob Day in the mainstream media of referring to it as "Steak and _______ Day" where "_______" is some euphemism. To Confusing Manifestation, however, I would point out that this article is not a hoax; the holiday does exist and the Google search I previously mentioned [2] shows many other hits including the 4-year-old "steakandbjday.com" domain, which comes in at #3. Given the subject matter it's not that surprising that people might feel it was an offhanded radio joke, but as also previously mentioned, some of us who don't live in New England or listen to that sort of radio show do celebrate it. Novelty does not equal lack of notability, nor does an uncomfortable concept. Raindog469 16:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Of course this is a made up holiday, No Holiday ever made itself. Someone one had to make them, usually hallmark. How are we deleting this and keeping talk like a pirate day or secretaries day.--Kev62nesl 06:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Publication by a licensed radio station makes the event noteable. Trjn 15:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • There arent very many national holidays around the world. I assume you mean a public/bank/free-day-off holiday. Fathers day is not, infact, most 'holidays' are not national holidays, I know this is a pretty bad argument against, but its not a very strong argument for, either. Trjn 15:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, there is no limit to its growth. Not to mention the very word 'encyclopedic' means encompassing and embracing all fields. The argument is flawed, could you elaborate? Trjn 15:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I really think that over 40,000 Google hits (on the quoted phrases "steak and bj day" and "steak and blowjob day") ought to be considered proof of significance, not to mention notability. People are plainly looking for information on the holiday, no matter what the deleters' personal feelings on the matter may be. Raindog469 16:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sadie Hawkins Day is a holiday made up in a comic strip, with a similar level of interest as Steak and Blowjob Day, and no officially recognized observances, yet is not marked as an AfD. As for SaBJD greeting cards.... well, they're not pretty, but they do exist. [www.cafepress.com/buy/steak/-/pv_design_prod/p_texasbigbird.43375193/pNo_43375193/id_10522426/fpt_________ar__gQ_DA____a___H/opt_/c_59/pg_] Part of the whole idea of SaBJD is "no cards, no flowers, no nights on the town, just...." well, you know the rest. So greeting cards really shouldn't exist, even though they do. Raindog469 16:55, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wp:not#Wikipedia_is_not_censored; the use of offensive language, even in the title, should not be an issue. The fundamental issue here is whether every idiotic idea some DJ proposes on the radio deserves an encyclopedia article. The goal of wikipedia is to document significant things and events, not to provide a forum for popularizing insignificant cruft. That's what the debate should focus on. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I assume that by your use of the term "idiotic idea" and other deleters' use of the term "bad joke" that many of you have some personal problem with the subject matter. What makes the aforementioned Sadie Hawkins Day, with a similar originally-joking origin and current level of popularity, notable that doesn't also apply to Steak and Blowjob Day? Raindog469 18:35, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What makes Sadie Hawkins Day notable is that it's been around since 1937. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:51, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think 45,000 google hits demonstrates its notability. If it doesn't, and if Trjn's referenced "licensed radio station" argument holds no water, I think the criteria for notability needs to be made a little more concrete. Raindog469 18:37, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Licensed radio stations are automatically notable. A single meme one creates isn't automatically notable. 40,000 Ghits isn't very much for a meme. --Rory096 20:27, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree strongly with the above. While you are correct that this is not a vote, the whole point is to reach a consensus. Consensus means general agreement or unanimity. What better way to form consensus than to have people say they agree with the original proposition? Are you suggesting that if people agree completely with the nomination that they just don't add their voice at all? -- RoySmith (talk) 12:56, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If it is not a vote, then why would you want people to come into the talk and then vote and add nothing new? The decision should be heavily influenced by the argument within the topic itself, if someone wishes to counterargue any point then that is fantastic and is heavily encouraged. Voting, and 'reaching a consensus' is foolish, you cannot reach a consensus with only the parties who are interested to vote, or the odd person who stumbles across the VfD to vote. The only way to reach one would be to poll a large group outside the influence of Wikipedia after they read the article. The point of this is to see if the article is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, if it meets the standards or notability, not if people think it should be in or not. -Trjn 15:51, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Per nom" means that they agree with the nom, so it is expressing their opinion, not just voting. --Rory096 20:27, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's worth clarifying what not voting means. In a vote, there are strict rules about who is eligible to vote, and if you meet those eligibility requirements, your vote gets counted. Add up all the votes, and whichever side comes out with a bigger sum wins. With the system we have here, whoever closes the discussion has a lot of flexibility to decide which votes count and which don't (i.e. sockpuppets), and then apply some judgement as to whether consensus has been reached without being bound by some strict and exact numerical threshold. If twenty people write nothing more than Delete per nom and two people write long cogent essays on why the article should be keep, that's still a consensus to delete (assuming no sockpuppetry or the like). -- RoySmith (talk) 21:36, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is, everyone is agreeing to a nomination that has been shown to be in-large false. There have been plenty of arguments that the article is notable, and the Precedence/Radio Stations with a license are noteable is almost definitive combined with the addition of other articles and agurments, so their votes are more or less void of substance, and there are a large number of votes based from an invalid argument. Trjn 02:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ill say it again, there is a clear Precedence that Radio Stations with a license are noteable, which heavily supports the case that a large radio event by a noteable radio station should be noteable by inheritence and consumer/community celebration, which of course there is. Trjn 02:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That the station itself is notable doesn't imply everything done by every employee of that station is notable as well. As for Administrative Professionals' Day, it at least has going for it in the notability department that it's been around in one form or another since 1952, and was proclaimed by U.S. Secretary of Commerce. When the Secretary of Commerce proclaims Steak and Blowjob Day is a national holiday, I'll stand up and salute. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is explicitly NOT Wikipedia's place to spread the word. Our job is to document, not promote. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:06, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, it does look like even if the article is kept this time, someone else will just nominate it for AFD again in a couple weeks. Shame that its deletion will set a precedent so that when its popularity continues to grow the deleters can then cite "recreation of deleted page" as a reason for continued deletion. Raindog469 01:39, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I get the impression you'd need to create an entry for that film itself first (not so many porno compilations on WP that I've noticed) and defend its notability. Raindog469 01:39, 14 June 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.
More