Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Great Googly Moogly
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 22:47, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Great Googly Moogly[edit]
We don't even have an article on the show the expression is from, nor do we give any information that could be useful to someone who was already aware of the phrase. --fvw* 22:18, 2005 Jan 22 (UTC)
- After the update, I'd like to change my vote to a (rather weak) keep. --fvw* 23:24, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
- Delete. The expression was also used in the song "Don't Eat the Yellow Snow" by Frank Zappa, but that doesn't make it notable. For everyone's information, the creator of this page (Potatoeman57 | talk | contributions) has just vandalized User:Jimbo Wales, and also created Condalangus Rice under an anonymous IP (see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Condalangus Rice). -- Curps 22:39, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Judge edits, not contributors. Thank you for the info, but unless you want to claim some ulterior disruptive motive for creating this article, it's utterly irrelevant. And even if you wanted to claim such a motive, you're better off saving it and keeping it for a possible future Request for Comment. JRM 00:05, 2005 Jan 27 (UTC)
- Much as I think vandalizing pages, etc, is reprehensible, I also don't think it's particularly germane to the discussion at hand. This article should stand or fall on its own merits. Oddly enough, I think there may be some value here. I've heard people use the phrase "Great Googly Moogly", and wondered about the origin. This article, silly as it may be, would have actually given me some useful (well, if not actually useful, at least relevant) information about that. So, I'm going to go out on a limb here and give it a
Cleanup and Weak Keep. The Zappa reference should be added to the article. --RoySmith 01:54, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- * Upon further research, I've found a bit of history to this, and did a bit of article sprucing-up. I'm thus upgrading my vote to a full-strength Keep (but the article could still use some cleanup). A couple more like this and they're going to kick me out of the ADW.
--RoySmith 02:15, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC).
- Delete, not notable, trivial. Megan1967 01:57, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Clean up and keep. I've long wondered at the source of this expression. --Calton 04:35, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- potatoeman57 i vote Keep for the article i created. and i don't consider myself a vandal and i will be more careful about following the rules from now on.
- Keep, this could be helpful to someone. Wyss 07:42, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, frequency of use and obscurity of origin make it worth having an entry. Lacrimosus 00:41, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Ambi 12:29, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Great googly keep. —RaD Man (talk) 19:17, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Call me a baby, but I love that show! -Frazzydee|✍ 21:35, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. This is a phrase that is much loved in R&B/Blues circles -- RyanFreisling @ 22:48, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Keep for being used in one of the funniest movies ever. -- Netoholic @ 23:39, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)
- Keep, I am yet again violating my personal policy not to vote on notability, but this is factual, relevant to a heterogeneous and unbounded group of people, and admitting no obvious merging with a previously established article. (Do you notice how I'm slowly setting policy for myself? :-) Therefore, from the bottom of my inclusionist heart, Keep. JRM 00:05, 2005 Jan 27 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.