Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newtonmas/2004-12-24

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 - kept

Newtonmas

This article is looks like a "completely idiosyncratic non-topic" from the deletion policy.--Woodstone 18:17, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)

• Does this fall under a neologism? Or an apple tree, for that matter? Delete. hfool 18:31, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Tentative keep. Google finds quite a number of references, so apparently this wasn't pulled out of thin air. Shimeru 18:50, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)
• keep. I and a number of other people celebrate this holiday every year. It seems worth including to me. I decided the holiday had finally reached some level of critical mass to try putting it in Wikipedia. --G Gordon Worley III 19:42, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Daft but true. Keep. Dan100 19:46, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Norman Rogers\^talk 19:50, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Heathencruft, part of the ongoing campaign to abolish religion. But also fascinating and encyclopedic. Andrewa 20:39, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • If that is the reason for inclusion it is quite non-NPOV and should be deleted.Woodstone
    • Comment: If I were to vote my POV, then I'd vote to delete. I spend a lot of time promoting Christianity, but that's not what Wikipedia is about, except in the indirect sense that Wikipedia promotes truth and understanding. My reason for keeping this article is that it's encyclopedic. The motives of those who promote Newtonmas are no more relevant to this decision than is my POV. Sorry if that wasn't clear before, I was trying too hard to be brief but not dry. No change of vote. Andrewa 22:26, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Keep. I am a Newtonmas celebrater. -- 00:08, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Keep. I, too, celebrate Newtonmas.--69.48.14.216 00:12, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Both the above votes are by the same IP, who has a total of 3 edits, all to this VfD. Not sure if it's in good faith or not. My vote stands. hfool 23:16, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete, if only to abolish religion, PoV vote. Wyss 00:23, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. PoV is a bogus reason, there are religious people who like to celebrate this too (we aren't all Christians, you know). iMeowbot~Mw 02:20, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Heh heh. Please don't take my "PoV vote" remark too seriously. It seems notable enough, and celebrations on the 21st and 25th of December both of multiple origins and current expressions. Wyss 19:52, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Delete: Part of an ongoing advocacy campaign, indeed. It is too much a part of that to be verifiable, established fact. (A mass for Newton, eh? And that's not religious how?) Geogre 04:21, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Delete. I don't believe the claims of the Newtonmas celebrators and I doubt these are real votes. An entirely rhetorical holiday that, by an amazing coincidence, has the same date as Xmas. How many people celebrate for real? Not a real holiday until Hallmark sells Newtonmas Cards. --BM 16:19, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• keep, ok it's a little daft but it is an actual holiday, albeit a minority one, and not a hoax. I think this should definatly remain, wikipedia contains a lot more obscure articles (see some of the Star Wars fancruft that's floating around). Rje 19:01, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

delete -- but happy Newtonmas, to celebrants. --Christofurio 21:30, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

• Comment: It seems to me that what this article needs to make it a solid keeper is a good solid attribution, such as an authority (presumably a humanist or secularist advocate) who promoted the idea. Surely one of the supporters above can come up with this, and use it to improve the article? Otherwise (and at the risk of arguing from the silence) it looks decidedly dodgy, but no change of vote. Andrewa 23:02, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. I second Andrewa; the current version reads too much like it's promoting the concept rather than neutrally describing it, but it has potential. It's not a hoax and it's not vanity, so my dapper little inclusionist heart says Keep. JRM 02:18, 2004 Dec 26 (UTC)
• Keep. If we can have Pi day and International Talk Like a Pirate Day, we can have this. Bryan 20:11, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete until someone can verify that this really exists as anything more than essentially a hoax. I'm a secular humanist, have been active in the field previously (writing for freethought publications, etc.) and have not heard of this except offhandedly as a "wouldn't it be neat if...?" joke thing. The links provided on page don't seem authoritative as sources. If it's real, contributing editor(s) should be able to provide a major secular humanist reference of some sort describing it as a real holiday. DreamGuy 09:32, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. This is more of a transhumanist holiday than a secular humanist holiday but it is real to the extent that we wish each other happy newtonmas around Dec. 25 rather than xmas which we do not celebrate. I've never heard of the Newton tree though, maybe Gordon made that up. --Macterra 21:10, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• OK, so... if you simply wish someone a happy Newtonmas, how does that count as a real holiday instead of a joke holiday? I wish people a Merry Giftsmas but I don't think it's a real holiday that deserves an article. And the Newtontree does sound like complete nonsense. DreamGuy 00:00, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC)

• Keep, and edit to NPOV. Etz Haim 19:39, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

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.