Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fora
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Points of interest related to Internet forums on Wikipedia |
---|
Category - - - - |
This is a list of transcluded discussions on the deletion of articles related to internet discussion fora. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting.
You can help maintain this list by:
- adding new items, by adding "{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}}" to the top of the list below (replace PageName with the name of the page to be deleted).
- removing closed AFDs.
- removing unrelated discussions.
If you wish, you may also:
- tag discussions by adding "{{subst:delsort|internet discussion fora}} <small>-- ~~~~</small>" on a new line. You can automate this task by adding {{subst:deltab|internet discussion fora}} to your monobook.js file. See Template:Deltab for instructions.
Consult WP:DEL for Wikipedia's deletion policy. Visit WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day.
This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Websites
Contents |
[edit] Fora
- 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 06:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Engi no jutsu
Overly lengthy entry about a non-notable Naruto role-playing forum. Reads off like an FAQ for the site, something Wikipedia is not. Fails WP:WEB test of notability. NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 05:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
ATTENTION!
If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a ballot, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting heads. You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing!Note: Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using
|
- I'm not seeing any sockpuppets, anyone care to explain? Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 08:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — Dark Shikari talk/contribs 05:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 05:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as pure vanity. 728 Ghits, all of which appears to be from forum posts. Fails WP:WEB miserably and also runs afoul of all three principles of Wikipedia: WP:NPOV, WP:NOR and WP:V. I'll caution that we may see a bit of meatpuppetry with this nomination. --TheFarix (Talk) 10:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Per above notability, original research and verifiability concerns. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 11:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Violates the main three principles per theFarix, and any notability principles regardless. ColourBurst 14:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as per TheFarix - Whpq 16:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --- Hong Qi Gong 19:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as vanity for a non-notable website. Also fails WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, and Wikipedia is not a repository of external links. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 06:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and above, as it fails web. --Kunzite 12:38, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --Alexie 23:28, 31 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.
- 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. (aeropagitica) (talk) 21:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ozone Fan Forum
A non-notable web forum --Nonpareility 03:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete No assertion of notability. Flunks WP:WEB. SubSeven 05:20, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete agree - CrazyRussian talk/email 05:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom --Mecanismo | Talk 11:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, non-notable web forum, and it's not even for ozone fans. JIP | Talk 14:48, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, fails WP:WEB. --Coredesat talk. ^_^ 22:41, 27 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.
- 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. (aeropagitica) (talk) 09:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Texas Holdem Forums
Vanity entry for totally un-notable, low traffic website. 2005 22:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. WP:VAIN; fails WP:WEB. -- Nishkid64 Talk Contribs 23:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete I had prod'ed as failing WP:WEB, the prod was removed when this AFD nomination was made. It is a waste of the communities resources to AFD nominate on top of a prod, but my opinion on the article is unchanged. GRBerry 01:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Fold, er, I mean Delete as WP:VAIN and failing WP:WEB.-- danntm T C 01:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. Not notable and doesn't warrant an article. Rray 02:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, absolutely no evidence that site meets WP:WEB. --Kinu t/c 05:30, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:WEB. Essexmutant 22:21, 28 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.
- 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 merge and redirect to IGN. — CharlotteWebb 23:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Vestibule
Completely non-notable board outsite its members, a well written subsection on IGN is sufficient, and redirection of The Vestibule to IGN should sort things out. It may be worth noting the state of the page currently is very bad. Asterism 16:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect We can't have one article per every board a forum has, no matter how notable. Merge any useful content in IGN and redirect. If we remove all the fancruft, the article becomes one paragraph long. -- ReyBrujo 16:40, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect I'm entirely in agreement. Merge what (little) redeemable material that exists into IGN and turn The Vestibule into a redirect. Sephylight 17:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect There's not much in there, but you could put a (very small) section about it in IGN page. Scrap the list of fads. --Smobey 17:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect This isn't notable enough for it's own article, mostly useless things are added to this article... --TehBrandon 21:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure how to post on this page exactly, I just wanted to say I completely rewrote the article on The Vestibule. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.108.219.112 (talk • contribs) .
- Just put a *'''Comment''' at the beginning of your opinion, then your thoughts, finishing with ~~~~ to sign your post. Also, thanks for your effort. The main concern is that, by allowing a board from a forum to be left as a standalone article, we may see several other articles about forums in Wikipedia. Please see the web notability: Even if an entire website meets the notability criteria, its components (forums, articles, sections) are not necessarily notable and deserving of their own separate article. -- ReyBrujo 22:09, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment What is the point of a wiki if your just going to eliminate the pages which you feel are not worthy. As long as no one is using the page as a forum ( and some are I am sure ) then leave it. Even if its only a little info about it. Its a wiki not news. 71.113.78.158 16:34, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Please read my comment immediately above yours: Even if an entire website meets the notability criteria, its components are not necessarily notable. Everyone can edit Wikipedia, but we must be selective with the articles. -- ReyBrujo 18:01, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- I don't see why it should be deleted, a small section on the IGN page just isn't enough, its a complexe place that needs explaining in detail. Hows this for a deal - If i can make it bigger add more ect don't delete it Eagle5 22:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Comment It might be better to make an article for the IGN Boards as a whole (I see that it currently directs to IGN). There is precedent set by GameFAQs and the GameFAQs message boards article- even the largest individual boards have been rightfully stopped from making their own articles. 71.67.132.178 04:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect I agree with this above comment. Should be trimmed and moved to an IGN Boards article. --Icep 04:24, 5 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.
- 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. (aeropagitica) (talk) 10:06, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Xtreme iTalk
Article about a webforum, simply doesn't assert meeting WP:WEB. Upon checking, I find no evidence that it does, either. [1], [2] (only mentioned on ~20 different web sites, most are forums and non seem to be reliable sources. --W.marsh 19:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Tom Harrison Talk 19:22, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
SpeedyStrong Delete. Non-notable forum that has only been around for 8 months with less than 150 members, created by a user whose vanity bio page has already been deleted. --Dennette 19:29, 27 August 2006 (UTC)- Strong delete as part of Taylor Hewitt's blatant self-promotion campaign. Not a CSD candidate - A7 does not cover web content. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 20:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete a non-notable web site.--RMHED 22:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete - Awyong has us on a legal technicality here; A7 doesn't cover websites. It certainly needs to go, though, as vanity. - Richardcavell 23:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Strong Delete with a recommendation that it be speedily deleted per WP:SNOW. Geoffrey Spear 12:58, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Up I think this forum deserves a spot on wikipedia. Taylor Hewitt 00:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
---
Guys I'm not trying to promote myself! I'm a big user of wikipedia and I want to be part of it all. My forum will be one of the most popular in the world one day and then you will see that it deserved a spot a long time ago. Taylor Hewitt 22:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
- Strong delete, no evidence from reliable sources that this site meets WP:WEB. And if your forum does become one of the most popular in the world one day, create an article, but until then, WP:NOT a crystal ball. --Kinu t/c 05:45, 30 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.
- 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. (aeropagitica) (talk) 15:32, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Insert Funn13 Here
Article presumably authored by one of the creators, Beast Megatron (talk • contribs). Was tagged for notability; tag removed without comment. Wikipedia tops the Google hits, which proves that this is effective as WP:SPAM if nothing else; gets 7 unique ghits of 69 total. No references cited and the Google results including nothing that could be construed as a reliable source. Fails to demonstrate notability per WP:WEB; fails to meet WP:V; presumably WP:SPAM and/or WP:VAIN. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
- Strong delete. Totally, inexplicably, irredeemably and utterly fails to assert notability per WP:WEB. Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 13:43, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete for now, unless secondary reference are included which substantiate notability. Addhoc 14:46, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete I can find nothing that makes this notable, and it fails WP:WEB as such. Thε Halo Θ 16:15, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete - This "webcomic" is actually hosted on a forum thread. I didn't tag it as CSD in case one of those "A7 is for bios only" admins removed it. - Hahnchen 16:31, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
- Strong delete, webcomic hosted on a forum? Utterly fails WP:WEB, possible WP:SPAM per the large collection of external links to each... and... every... issue. --Kinu t/c 16:53, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
- Insert detetion here. Irongargoyle 17:01, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
- Delete no assertion of having any chance of satisfying WP:WEB. Considering that is a webcomic hosted on a forum, both of which must provide evidence of notablility, this is a perfect storm of non-notability. Also, potential WP:VSCA per the lengthy description of the entire storyline and links to every single issue.-- danntm T C 20:41, 26 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.