Deletion of Rod Allen Drinking Game

Comment: I also want to remind people, one newspaper article does not make anything 'notable'. Notability standards usually require citing more than one major news source.   Please look at a few of the Wiki guidelines. |Wiki is not a Publisher of Original Thought - Specifically - ''Original inventions: If you invent the word frindle or a new type of dance move (or drinking game), it is not article material until a secondary source reports on it. Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day!''  Since the newspaper article was written after the Wiki page, and refers specifically to the wiki page, the article is in violation of this rule.  |Sources cite on an article must be Reliable - Specifically - Wikipedia cannot cite itself as a source—that would be a self-reference.  The newspaper article references the wiki article as a source, hence the wiki article would be self-referencing by using the newspaper article as a source to verify this game. The fact of the matter is, this article fails two of the Wiki policies on Article Standards.  |No Original Research, and |Verifiability, and the majority of anons in this discussion are not basing their statements on the Wiki Standards but on their personal feelings for a sports team. As it is jeff, I personally feel your stand holds no merit when applied to the Wiki Article Standards
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:RS||WP:OR||WP:V)

Comment: per , . Is this a joke? The only source referenced in the article cites this very Wikipedia article as a source! Even if this game actually exists (i.e. is played by more than two people worldwide), it's still so silly as not to warrant mention in an encyclopedia unless it has some sort of actual notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:NOR)

Comment: per , , , and #Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information|Wikipedia is Not an Instruction Manual on how to play a game. The cardinal sin here, though, is that this article is inherently |Unverifiable. Assuming this is even notable (which I do not concede), how does one verify any of what's claimed here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:V||WP:NFT||WP:NOT||WP:V)

Comment: You don't have to be in school for it to be |made up in school
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day (WP:NFT)

Comment: Unfortunately, pretty much every link mentioning it is a blog, which do not count as reliable sources. And unless the Rod Allen Drinking Game becomes an enormous sweeping phenomenon, or outrageously popular, it won't merit an article. It is still not notable, not verifiable, an inside joke, and is basically something |made up at school one day. The fact that it's barely half a week old is only one of the many, many reasons it should be deleted. I could just as easily create a Mike Lange drinking game with drinks based on every time he says something outrageous, and it would just as easily be worth deleting. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, nor should it become a catalyst for insignificant fads
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day (WP:NFT)

Comment: Since Blogs, Personal Websites, and message board posts are not concidered Reliable or Reputable sources, can you cite sources that do pass the |verifiable, |Reliable, and |Reputable sources test.  The news paper does not count as a primary source as it 1) is published after the wikipedia article was made and 2) does not cite the source of this game. If this game is so big and widely known, where are the other articles or news stories on it?  Where is the primary source of information for this
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:RS||WP:OR)

Comment: per nom and Uncle G; misses  by a long way and  applies
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:NFT)