Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of BitTorrent sites

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 was delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 21:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comparison of BitTorrent sites

Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files. It claims to be a comparison, but really there isn't much of a comparison, it's just a collection of links. Borb 18:46, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:NOT. --Aaron 19:15, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
• Dont ever dare to delete this article Why should you? weather it points to copyrighted files or not;this is Encyclopedia supposed to include every knowledge the human race might know! this is ,i think your idea ;no body supports you except the MPAA and RIAA! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Didimos (talk • contribs).
• Being neither of the above, Delete as a repository of links, and thus against WP:NOT. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:03, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and I replaced the AfD tag removed by the above editor, too, by the by. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete It's little more than a collection of links. TJ Spyke 20:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NOT. This "list" is only being used as a link directory. --TheFarix (Talk) 22:51, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per pretty much everyone here. If this were more of a comparison and less of a link directory, we'd talk. BigHaz - Schreit mich an (Review me) 23:12, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete it looks like a pretty useful comparison, but is unencyclopedic. Musaabdulrashid 23:31, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete web directory. Gazpacho 01:21, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment New columns have been proposed, which will make it more encyclopedic. But it looks like it's goung to be deleted anyways. Ultra Loser 04:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Neither of the proposed columns will make the article encyclopedic, nor are they particularly useful. Comparison charts works when you are comparing features, but there are no features here to compared. --TheFarix (Talk) 11:58, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment No. don't delete it. i've come back to this page a few times, and its proved useful.

• Comment Yes, it might be useful, but that doesn't make it encyclopaedic. Also, replaced the AfD tag again... --Borb 16:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Maybe it should be deleted because it's unencyclopedic, but it's worth saying that to me Wikipedia proves more and more to be a good (or maybe the best) starting point for my searches, whether I'm looking for knowledge or just for some good links related to a topic. From this point of view this article is pretty useful. I think that one of the strenghts of Wikipedia is that it's much more than just an encyclopedia.
• Keep and allow this page to be developed further. It is much more than a "collection of links" and we maintain several other encyclopedic comparison-type lists here. Yamaguchi先生 23:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete unless the article is completely rewritten. At the moment it is unencyclopedic. bbx 03:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete It does little to enrich knowledge - as a collection of samples, it barely holds water. --Tree 04:08, 20 September 2006 (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.