Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turtle Club

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 keep. Mailer Diablo 00:26, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Turtle Club

Non-notable "club". Page essentially the first half of seven jokes without the punchlines. Nedlum 23:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this is a legitimate thing. It is predominately American and dates back to at least the 1950's. [1], [2], and [3] among other links easily found on Google. IrishGuy 23:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I thought for sure this was going to be an easily-deletable WP:NFT case, or at best a reference to that scene in the movie The Master of Disguise: "You mean I'm not turtle-y enough for the turtle club? Tur-tle, tur-tle..." But it turns out it's real, verifiable, and has quite a long history. Oh, and check out this great picture from one of the linked pages. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely KEEP. This article is one of few remaining on the internet about this historically famous organization, except for the few links in the article itself. So what if there are no answers to the questions? Figure them out! I hope to add more of the questions to the article and maybe, for those who remain clueless, I might find a way to insert the answers in some obscure form. On the other hand, should Wikipedia provide a fudge sheet for those who wish to become members of this illustrious organization... I think not. In the meantime, YBYSAIA. Stepp-Wulf 00:15, 4 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Keep. I had the same first impression as Andrew, but I'm satisfied that this is notable and worth keeping. Fluit 00:57, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand to include more information, if possible. Something has to be done about the answers to the riddles. Either the questions should be removed, or the answers need to be revealed in the article, or maybe a link to the answers could be provided. --Brandon Dilbeck 02:20, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep & Expand meets notabily requirements. Although requires some attention. --Srik e it^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 12:09, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Among other things it is mentioned in the book The Right Stuff. JoshuaZ 22:01, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 03:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've never heard of it until now, but it does appear to be a noteworthy enough "club". Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it, but boy, that article really needs to suck less. More historical context, less ... erm ... suckiness. --- GWO

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.