Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FTU

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - deleted - SimonP 14:17, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] FTU

Very small, non-notable internet forum. Fagtown USA only gets 89 results on google. There are between 75-100 registered posters at any given version of FTU, perhaps 50 being regular posters, and 25 posting daily. Delete. —Markaci 2005-03-16 T 08:56 Z

• Delete, not notable, website ad. Megan1967 09:22, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Not a website ad, simply a group of people trying to record their pitiful existence in history. Traffic to be found from wikpedia is not noteworthy, but many people have frequented this forum in the past, and some may want to remember it. It's been around for over 4 years.
  • Above vote by 24.161.248.80, author of the article with no other contributions.
    • Note: 24.161.248.80 is not the author of the article. But that's moot.
• Delete as vanity. Radiant_* 10:03, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, unfortunately wikipedia is not a place to record your existence in history. Kappa 11:11, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, the lack of google hits isn't a result of a lack of interest, but instead a result of ezboard's software which limits google searches. Regular posters aside, the number of lurkers at FTU have numbered in the hundreds. It was connected to major DBZ-related websites and also websites that had hits in the millions. If you are going have records of Dragon Ball Z websites, you need to also include the dissenters and rogues. And besides, if wikipedia isn't the place to record your existence in history, what is? Action Hank 13:43, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Note: user has 8 edits total, four of which related to FTU and one is his user page.
    • You have to start somewhere, don't you? Action Hank
• Delete. vanity. Avriette 13:49, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete far too small/obscure for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Virtually nothing described in the article is of any importance to anyone not directly involved with the forum (who consequently know about it already anyway). Also, I'm hesitant to keep any websites/forums that don't, at a minimum, have their own domain name. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:41, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)
• Note: Beware of Sockpuppets in this vote the forum in question has put up a thread entitled "Wikipedia FTU entry! Vote keep!" urging members to post sockpuppet votes in order to keep the article. I quote: "Everyone should vote to keep the entry, and see what happens. Can we outnumber the fags at Wikipedia who are taking a break from posting new and pointless information about computer languages to try to remove a harmless entry about a message board community?" Additional note to anyone considering posting a sockpuppet vote: Don't bother, it won't be counted. See the following policy, which appears at the top of the Wikipedia:Votes for deletion page: Anonymous and new users are welcome to contribute to the discussion, but their votes may be discounted, especially if they seem to be made in bad faith. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:55, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)
  • You mean "beware of bad-faith votes by new users", not "beware of sockpuppets". They're not sockpuppets if they're different people. I agree that this article should be deleted, and I am certain that the admin will look at the justified votes and see a clear consensus to delete. So there's no reason to go around calling the new users "sockpuppets" without giving evidence. Make your well-reasoned delete vote and chill. RSpeer 18:18, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
• Hurr, the people who frequent the forum aren't allowed to defend it's right to be included. Only people who don't know anything about the subject are permitted to make decisions concerning it.
  • Oh, you are allowed to defend yourself by making sensible arguments that show us what is so special about FTU. You are not allowed to 'defend' yourself by making ungrounded 'keep' votes, or by attacking people here, or by making fallacious arguments. So far we've been told it existed for four years, and 'many' people have frequented it. Neither is anything special. Radiant_* 08:50, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)
    • What makes my keep vote ungrounded? Personal bias? An objective vote doesn't truly exist, so why discount mine simply because my bias is stronger than yours?
      • We're not really looking for votes here, but rather for reasons. There are bazillions of forums on the web, and we don't want an article on all of them. So if you can give us a good reason why your forum is special, we'll keep the article. Radiant_* 13:34, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. These punks wish they could match the mighty VfD-defeating power of the GNAA. As it stands right now, they fail it pitifully. grendel|khan 16:35, 2005 Mar 17 (UTC)
  • FTU isn't a trolling board. Also, good post there, buddy. Way to advertise. Action Hank 20:50, 2005 Mar 17 (UTC)
    • I signed your edit for you. And to respond---both FTU and the GNAA have sent emissaries forth to aggrandize them, to smear their fame across Wikipedia like a mighty brown stink. Obscure composers of the seventeenth century don't come here to write about themselves; they're important enough that other people do it for them. FTU and the GNAA aren't. It's just the GNAA are better at defeating VfD. FTU, pathetically, fails it. grendel|khan 16:08, 2005 Mar 22 (UTC)
• Keep No good reason to delete this. There are thousands of seemingly irrelevant articles in the Wikipedia. This entry is facing undue atttention and criticism. Let it be. Marcg106 14:13, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. [D]isregards racial, social, and ethical political correctness in pursuit of entertainment: where I come from, that's code for "behaving like assholes". In any case, non-notable pitiful bid for attention. --Calton | Talk 00:41, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• LOL! Yo, socks: If this is such a "harmless entry," perhaps you'd care to pay for the server space. No? Delete as a sockpuppet-supported waste of electrons and possible vandalism. - Lucky 6.9 04:20, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Note: There hasn't been a single sockpuppet vote.
  • It boggles the mind that you people want to delete this article, while Planet Namek gets an entry, and there's HUGE entries for the multitudes of trolling on the Slashdot forums, which, believe me, is NOT interesting to anyone other than Slashdot posters. What makes them so special? DBZ Uncensored and by extension FTU have affected hundreds of people. Believe me, there are far more obscure entries in the Wikipedia. Marcg106 14:04, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable, sockpuppet supported. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:00, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable. --Carnildo 04:53, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Strong delete and consider placing hard bans on these vandals. Binadot 14:05, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Vandals? Fascinating. What did they vandalize? Is being on the losing side of a VfD now considered vandalism?

It's not that I'm defending this article existing, but people in this vote are far too keen on attacking new users who don't know the inclusion standards of Wikipedia, and calling them everything from sockpuppets to vandals. VfD is not for attacks, it is for justifications for or against deleting. Again, give your well-reasoned delete vote and chill. RSpeer 18:25, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

Of course they're vandals. One of them blanked the user page of the VfD nominator, Markaci, and replaced it with "faget extrodineire" (and then blanked it again to write lol). That kind of crap is not acceptable on Wikipedia. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:10, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

• • It's funny how you people are just dismissing every "keep" vote as a sockpuppet vote. How do we know you're not using sockpuppets to vote against this?

Comment: Edit histories. Lacrimosus 06:54, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• • And who are you to decide whether this is notable? Everything is notable! I think people are voting with a bias against this forum, simply for what they discuss. Gee, Hitler was a horrible person, should we delete his entry, then?

The FTU entry does need to be cleaned up, of course, but it should stay. They are NOT vandals. Marcg106 14:07, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Keep I too frequent the forum and before that I used to visit the website that birthed it, DBZ Uncensored. You have to realize that you guys that are voting against it live in a vacuum. The fact is, DBZU has had an enormous impact on the anime community. If it weren't for that site, we wouldn't have edit lists. We wouldn't have uncensored DVD's. That site got the ball rolling. Companies began to realize anime wasn't just for children. It was no longer possible to keep anime fans ignorant. And many others copied his example. Even animenewsnetwork. Psaros has since retired from his website but the web forum still thrives. So of COURSE that's why it was mentioned before the actual website. We probably should have created an entry for the website first. Of course, anime haters would be trolling that entry just as you're all trolling this one. I only visit GameFaqs for the combo guides but I still found the wikipedia entry for their messageboard interesting. I guess the fact that none of you knew George Washington personally makes his life boring and unimportant. Same mentality here. Utils 18:30, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete; a lot of words, but non-notable subject, non-notable meta-subject. -Ashley Pomeroy 23:49, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, sorry guys, but you didn't manage to "slip under the radar". Lacrimosus 06:54, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • I guess we could never hope to slip past you, slick. 24.161.248.80 07:50, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • I signed and timestamped this anonymous user's post for him, since he forgot to. Foobaz·o< 07:53, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
      • You can go ahead and sign and timestamp the rest of my posts in here too, thanks. It's wonderful that out of all the people here criticizing me, you at least have some friendly intentions.

Oh, interestingly enough, I happened to run across the defintion of sockpuppet voting, and it's used quite out of context here. Thanks guys.

KEEP-Yes this is a user vote. Since you are looking for arguments allow me to present one.

Aside from the obvious argument that Wikipedia has far more obscure entries, and may be in fact what Wikipedia is all about, there is also the fact that this is (or was) in fact the message board of a popular website (DBZ Uncensored). While it was not as popular as Planet Namek(which, as well as its messageboard has its ownt entry), any regular visitor to Planet Namek in it's heyday has heard of this site, and was in fact how I came across this messageboard. Secondly, while you may argue the obscurity of this board, the board is a fact of life. It has been in existance in some form or another for 5 years and will continue to exist for sometime. So it's not like this is really an advertisement or anything. And never, ever during this period has it been "dead".

Not only that, but I feel this entry will more interesting to the reader because pretty much anyone can be welcomed, and is allowed to post anything they want. It should be emphasized that most messageboards can not honestly claim this, as the vast majority of messageboards are far more strongly moderated, although few will admit it to being so(much as Wikipedia claims any article can be posted, but the existance of this page shows that in practice it doesn't). -Piccolo48

In short, I feel this is a solid article.

You might want to sign your comments in the future. You can do this without loggin in. Just add --~~~~ to your post. Like this: --Silas Snider (talk) 05:04, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

• Merge with the Dragon Ball Z article, or an article on the Dragon Ball Z forums. --Silas Snider (talk) 05:04, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

--response: The reason this wasnt done in the first place is because we felt the messageboard had it's own culture, even if it was part of a Dragon Ball Website at one point. Frankly, I do NOT think "obscurity" is a reason to disclude something from here, paricularly when the site this originated from was not "obscure", and is about a culture that \ has and will exist on the internet for a long time. The board WILL eventually get its own domain name, and unless you can name some SOLID AND FAIR GROUND RULES on why this article should NOT be included(ground rules which you feel apply to all Wikipedia articles, which i trust only a webmaster on this sight to make)

To say this article should be voted off because some random people feel it should is, at best, an ad-populum argument that shouldnt apply to an encyclopedia of all places. Place some ground rules, and then explain from there. Piccolo48Piccolo48

• Comment: We have ground rules: Wikipedia:Deletion policy. To talk of a "webmaster" of Wikipedia is to misunderstand the wiki concept - the idea here is that a consensus is developed by all interested users in accordance with existing, defined policy. Slac speak up! 05:12, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

KEEP- A very good site/board that was instrumental in convincing Funimation to release Dragonball Z over in America.

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.