Not that notable to deserve its own article. Dysprosia 00:20, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Hmm. Read the talk page. By "this is a real trolling phenomenon" I think Mike means "me and maybe a few of my friends do this." I tried google searching and couldn't find any evidence that this exists. Being an internet phenomenon, it should be on the internet somewhere, but I can't find any mention of it. You can't imagine how surprised this makes me. Isomorphic 00:44, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Funny you should say that. I'm as surprised as you are! Seriously, when I think of the time I've spent lately either on articles of my own or fixing up ones I stumble on that need a little TLC, it steams my fleckmans to see someone wasting bandwidth and hard drive space on something as banal and as useless as this. Another delete vote for yours truly if you would, Messrs. Admins. And, I'll try and take a look-see a bit later at that troll page. - Lucky 6.9 00:52, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I have seen people not of my association involve themselves in this trolling phenomenon. It is not just "me and maybe a few of my friends". Please read my Talk page and my non-stub article before making a decision. I am willing to see this article to be deleted. I am placing the content there (instead of in Internet troll) because I would rather the page Ambition trolling phenomenon be deleted than a massive edit/flame war erupt on Internet troll. In honoring Isomorphic's request: If this page is deleted, I will also remove the link to the deleted page from Internet troll, so no one else needs to. Mike Church 00:58, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
You say this exists. It's on the internet by definition. I invite you to post as many examples here as you can find (ones that weren't created today, please; this is not an invitation to start posting,) or better yet links to a page where people are discussing the phenomenon. This should be simple if it's even remotely notable. Isomorphic 01:14, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I've heard of, and seen, it. I agree with you that it doesn't serve its own article, just as most B-list trollculture phenomena don't, but I'll verify that it exists. P23 01:35, 6 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
You have about five days to expand in detail in a meaningful way. Until then, it just looks like vanity, delete. --Ben Brockert 01:09, May 5, 2004 (UTC)
Delete, created by notorious vanity poster. RickK 02:36, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Delete if not substantiated. Looks like a roundabout attempt at a vanity article. -- Cyrius|✎ 03:28, May 5, 2004 (UTC)
Looks like vanity nonsense to me. Delete john 03:43, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It seems to be just one or perhaps a handful of people causing some very minor mischief at a few websites. Maybe add another sentence or two of detail to the brief mention it gets on Ambition (card game). Everyking 05:03, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, delink, and otherwise erase. - Fennec 05:04, May 5, 2004 (UTC)
Delete. Insignificant, unsubstantiated, vanity. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:33, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unverifiable. IMO the whole Ambition thing stinks. Mike Church should abide by the spirit of the policy on autobiography and refrain from commenting on this and similar articles. If they are encyclopedic, they'll get included in time without his help. His involving himself gives them a possibly undeserved stigma. Andrewa 09:42, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Writing posts on your own trolls is simply bad form, especially when the trolling 'phenomenon' seems to be rather, shall we say, confined in its scope. Lord Bob 14:56, May 5, 2004 (UTC)
Inside joke that's not encyclopedic. Move to his user page, as with the Hall of Fame, also authored by him. Alcarillo 15:19, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
