Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drawball (2nd nomination)

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. --Coredesat 03:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Drawball

Drawball (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Previously nominated, but most of the keep arguments were along the lines of "I like it" or "This is interesting". This is generally a bad idea. (Note: I know that the linked essay is just an essay but I agree with most of what it says.)

Now then. Onto the article itself. As stated before, it fails WP:WEB. Its Alexa ranking is currently around 90,000 - rather poor for an Internet meme. It has no external coverage that I found in news sources. There are no reliable sources cited, and the content given is mostly unverifiable. I can't personally think of any arguments for keeping it, at least not rooted in policy. Crystallina 03:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• comment never before have I so wished that "it's interesting" was a valid argument. This is a pretty damn interesting website. But, yeah, probably not keepable...WP is not here to educate the world about every internet meme in existence--Dmz5 04:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Looked for any non-trivial mention of this, but all I could find is blogs and Wikipedia mirrors. No indication why this would pass WP:WEB. Seraphimblade 04:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. It's in {{db-web}} territory but because of it's history I don't want to speedy it. MER-C 05:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I'd expect much more ntoability for a net game - and there's little independent coverage. SkierRMH,07:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete interesting, not notable. Viridae^Talk 11:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Very reluctant delete What an interesting site (which I'd never heard of before). I almost wish I could invoke WP:ILIKEIT as a keep rationale. -- Kicking222 16:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete It looks awsome, but awsomnessness is not noteworthynessness. FirefoxMan 16:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Is there a section on art-related websites or anything similar where this would be better categorized if it doesn't deserve its own article?--BigCow 18:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Really very reluctant delete Isn't terribly notable, unfortunately. Perhaps a mention on the internet memes page, and possibly mention the South Korean flag incident on individual websites which participated? Shas 21:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete same reasons as last time, and still unreferenced after 9 months. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete — We tried to clean it up and give it a chance because so many people seemed to want it, but the regrettable truth is that there is no verifiability here. This article is an adorable little puppy that I'd like to keep around, but there's no one to take care of it and it pees in the house. It has to go. ~ Booya ^Bazooka 05:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. User:Booyabazooka has summed up my feelings on this all too well. Fails WP:V and WP:WEB. Axem Titanium 05:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - Drawball sucked after the vandals killed the LUEshimeister :( --- RockMFR 22:22, 18 December 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.