Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Social news bookmarking sites
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. - Mailer Diablo 05:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Social news bookmarking sites
Wikipedia is not a directory This article is cleary a directory to other sites. Scott3 22:44, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, unless this article can be completely re-written. Most of the sites on the list are not notable at all. If it could be pruned to the caliber of List of social networking websites, I would come back here and change my vote. I threw a few tags up, hoping more people might have a look at it. The other question that arises is: once this is cleaned up, will there even be enough notable entries to still have a list? I guess we'll find out. Until then, as I said, delete. Czj 22:49, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: These types of lists are also spam havens, so if this does by some miracle get fixed up enough to be keep-worthy, we should all add it to our watchlists. A lot of people have to monitor the social networking site list to keep it devoid of spam. Czj 01:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: Czj, please don't make comments like the above and than go ahead and make edits to the page it's only hypocritical, thank you. AcePuppy 02:02, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: Actually, the only edits I made on the article were fixing its title and adding the wikify, verify and cleanup tags. Feel free to check the page history before dropping accusations. Czj 02:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: Well I guess your wrong because here is one very recently: "(cur) (last) 15:45, August 5, 2006 Czj (Talk | contribs) m (update myspace #)" ..and obviously I did check before 'dropping accusations' AcePuppy 04:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: I thought you were referring to the article we're voting on right now. Either you mis-read my comment(s) above, or you are confusing social networking with social bookmarking, but I assume the first. I have absolutely nothing against List of social networking websites... it was up for deletion recently, and I voted to keep it, because there are many notable social networking sites. That page also has a lot more statistics and information than a mere category could display. What I was saying is that if this article (being the one we're voting on) could be improved to the same level as that one (which, again, I'm not sure if it's possible - are there really that many notable social bookmarking sites out there?), it'd be worthy of keeping. What I was saying was not hypocritical, because I fully support the other article in its state, which is why it's in my watchlist and also why I help to edit it regularly. Czj 16:48, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: My apologies I misread the articles as they both look alike. I have also deleted my Keep comment below. Again apologies. AcePuppy 16:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: I thought you were referring to the article we're voting on right now. Either you mis-read my comment(s) above, or you are confusing social networking with social bookmarking, but I assume the first. I have absolutely nothing against List of social networking websites... it was up for deletion recently, and I voted to keep it, because there are many notable social networking sites. That page also has a lot more statistics and information than a mere category could display. What I was saying is that if this article (being the one we're voting on) could be improved to the same level as that one (which, again, I'm not sure if it's possible - are there really that many notable social bookmarking sites out there?), it'd be worthy of keeping. What I was saying was not hypocritical, because I fully support the other article in its state, which is why it's in my watchlist and also why I help to edit it regularly. Czj 16:48, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: Well I guess your wrong because here is one very recently: "(cur) (last) 15:45, August 5, 2006 Czj (Talk | contribs) m (update myspace #)" ..and obviously I did check before 'dropping accusations' AcePuppy 04:42, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: Actually, the only edits I made on the article were fixing its title and adding the wikify, verify and cleanup tags. Feel free to check the page history before dropping accusations. Czj 02:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: Czj, please don't make comments like the above and than go ahead and make edits to the page it's only hypocritical, thank you. AcePuppy 02:02, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: These types of lists are also spam havens, so if this does by some miracle get fixed up enough to be keep-worthy, we should all add it to our watchlists. A lot of people have to monitor the social networking site list to keep it devoid of spam. Czj 01:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete From WP:NOT, "Wikipedia articles are not: Mere collections of external links or Internet directories" --Xyzzyplugh 12:32, 6 August 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.
