Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Open Alpha

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete by User:Doc glasgow Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 23:27, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Open Alpha

Not notable. Delete. brenneman^(t)(c) 01:07, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

• This is so borderline. Those TV show mentions are legit, and the Alexa rank has improved from the 600000 to the 300000s...I reserve the right to vote later....--CastAStone 01:13, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

• Reply. Open Alpha is one of the biggest and most popular technology vidcasts on the web. The host has featured on many other popular technology shows such as the extremely popular podcast This Week in Tech. All technically and gaming interested people know what Open Alpha is and it has received many downloads per episode. Have a look at the backlinks to see how popular the video and site are: here. cheers, Treelovinhippie 02:58, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• To Admins: Please take note that the user who has tagged this article for deletion has surprising done so with many of the other articles I have created/editted. He obviously likes the conflict it causes (as can be seen in the 'dispute box' which is on his user page). Treelovinhippie 05:41, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

• Comment - I think it goes without saying that Treelovinhippie's comments here and on his user page (both exhibiting ignorance of wikipedia policy and community norms, and an insulting lack of respect for his fellow wikipedians) warrants more attention from administrators than a perfectly reasonable AfD. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 05:37, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Notable television series.--Nicodemus75 05:45, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

• Not a TV series. But if it were, how are we gauging notability, so I can verify. Thanks - brenneman^(t)(c) 05:54, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm sure you'll come up with some subjective standard.--Nicodemus75 05:55, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
    • I'm left to interpret that as "It's notable because I say so, and I won't present any evidence to support my claim".
      brenneman^(t)(c) 07:01, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. The only claim of notability seems to be that the host has appeared on This Week In Tech and Call For Help. I don't see any legitimate evidence of popularity or newsworthiness. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 06:49, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Evidence. For those of you people who don't have a clue as to the popularity of Open Alpha....
  • Now as I have stated before, it is often difficult to state exact figures on the number of downloads per podcast, as often these are distributed via bittorrent (which is very difficult to track) and the podcasts end up all over the net with various other sources distributing it.
  • As I have said, also, the host of this show has featured on TWiT at least once (and in most cases more). TWiT is the number one podcast on the internet and has been at the top of the iTunes charts for a long time. They are a technology podcast and only feature people who are interesting and are well-known (i.e. this podcasts' host). That in itself should be enough to justify its popularity.
  • Another thing I'll post is a link to a post on http://www.digg.com (a social bookmarking site). Basically the number of 'diggs' is how many people have clicked to 'digg' it and is an indication of its popularity. See an example of a digg article posted for this podcast here: http://www.digg.com/technology/OpenAlpha.tv_Episode_1
• Delete. Encyclopedic notability not established by the article, which looks like advertising. Gamaliel 11:19, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable podcast. android79 13:03, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• delete deja vu. BTW, I'm a "technically and gaming interested person" but have never heard of this. — brighterorange (talk) 16:39, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Yeah, that claim is patently absurd. android79 16:48, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, I'll admit I was tempted to cut and paste my comments from the CommandN debate here... Only thing I'll add to my statements there is that the "diggs" on this cast are around 300 per episode, making it even less viewed than the non-notable CommandN. As a hardcore gamer who works in IT, I second brighterorange's comments.--Isotope23 19:23, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • The number of 'diggs' is a very, very rough guide as to the popularity of this podcast. digg.com is only one site (out of the many hundreds of other sites this podcast is backlinked from) and many people may not have clicked the digg button, but simply gone straight to the link.
    • And so based on your description, digg.com is basically worthless as a measure of this podcast's popularity.--Isotope23 13:57, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Why is this non-notable? What is the criteria to determine this? I notice that some people write that this podcast doesn't have enough viewers to be notable -- but how many viewers does a podcast need to be notable? And why that number? Please try to come up with substantial reasons for deleting articles. -- llywrch 00:20, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
  • See my comments under the AfD for TechPhile... No reason to have this coversation twice  :)--Isotope23 13:57, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. much like self-published authors and public-access TV. -R. fiend 18:06, 8 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.