Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jahbulon (3rd nomination)
nom seems to not really understand , , etc. As far as I can tell, the word exists, there are documentable beliefs about the word, and the fact of the controversy is even mentioned in a Masonic publication listed in the references at the bottom of the page. Looking at the talk page archives, the same parties appear to have been arguing about this since March. One can't help but think that this "debate" is intentionally constructed to give the appearance of a dispute about the encyclopedic status of the article. These secret socities and their games give me the creeps. Their goals of keeping certain information secret are diametrically opposed to the goals of Wikipedia. In this case, we need to see through the rhetoric and put the goals of Wikipedia first
— User:Ekajati, 15:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:V||WP:RS (Wikipedia:Verifiability)