Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Neopets

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 delete. -- AllyUnion (talk) 06:16, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Anti-Neopets

This page is unencyclopedic and seems a lot like self-advertising for the websites mentioned there. Josh 03:15, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, not notable, dictionary definition, forum advertisement. Megan1967 04:00, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep This is not an advertisement since the forum is a common place for Anti-Neopians. Also, the "dictionary definition" is because it is, as of right now, incomplete. This page, when it has more content, will provide more valuable information and I believe it is important to users concerned with this topic. --Tezeti 05:07, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Advertisement for obscure forum. Foobaz·✐ 05:32, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. It is more like an ad. Zzyzx11 05:37, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. This deffinately isn't an ad. It is info on a fast growing web movement.Blackdove
  • Note: User's second edit.
  • Note: Blackdove has made no edits outside of voting on this VfD (His/her first edit was to mistakenly vote to keep on the Talk:Anti-Neopets page).
  • Note: The above isn't relevant to the voting process and should not impact anyone's vote
• Question. Why should Anti-Neopians have its own article when it can be put on Neopets#Controversy and criticism? Zzyzx11 06:32, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Gamaliel 06:35, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Patently silly, and not a valid meme. Delete Radiant! 09:44, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Any useful information could be included on Neopets#Controversy and criticism. Carrp | Talk 14:35, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. If you read carefully, you will find that Anti-Neopets is an organization, and does NOT deserve to be in Neopets Controversy and Criticism. Nemmy 17:25, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Forum not large enough to warrant an article. Xezbeth 17:29, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Since the article will not be kept otherwise, I am removing all external links from the article. Please adjust your votes accordingly. --Tezeti 17:59, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm afraid you're missing the point here. It's not about the external links, it's about the organization not being notable enough for inclusion (if somebody hated apples and started the Anti-Apple Action, we wouldn't include that either). Radiant! 19:35, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Please see the post tezeti made to the 26-member forum advertised in the article pleading for users to come here and create an account to vote keep and push their POV agenda. Blatant attempt to cheat the VfD process. Something to consider while deciding whether to vote keep or delete.
• Comments
  • I have fixed the article considerably since it was proposed as a candidate for deletion. Regarding Reene's prior comments, the forum is the main forum, so it is a valuble external link and not just an advertisement. Please see the post Reene made on the forum and you can determine yourself which post has more POV. --Tezeti 16:47, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • Also, No-More-Neopets.tk is owned by Mae_Noelle and the forum is basically owned by a group of Administrators. I agree that maybe the geocities link should not have been there, so I removed it. However, I believe this article is written in a neutral manner and contributes information to Wikipedia. --Tezeti 16:47, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • I would not make self-promotion pages on Wikipedia, since it is an online encyclopedia and not a forum or blog. This is a group of people, of which there were over 100 of at one point, and I am simply stating their beliefs and history of the movement. --Tezeti 16:47, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • I know of at least 10 other Antineopian sites, however I chose to include the most viewed ones in this entry, which excludes my own web page. --Tezeti 16:47, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Thanks for explaining this all, but this whole movement still doesn't seem very notable to me. You say there were over 100 people at one point, which indicates that the movement was never that large to begin with, and is already on its decline. Checking the Antineopian forum, I find 26 members only. That's not much for an internet forum.Radiant! 21:00, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
• The membership is not declining, the reason that the membership has been reduced is that the original forum has been shut down for unknown reasons. Therefore, many of the members could not find this new one. The forum was started about one month ago and already has 26 members. I know of over 10 websites made by different users that are dedicated solely to Anti-Neopets. --Tezeti 21:41, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • Which indicates a whole 10 people are pissed off enough about being frozen to create a hate website and rant about how much Neopets sucks, the claims they make varying in veracity and some of them being outright false and slanderous. Even then, 100 members is not a lot when you consider how many users use Neopets. I could whip up 10 good looking anti-Tezeti websites in under a day (and wouldn't need to use free web hosts like Geocities to do it, as most/all of these so-called anti-neopets websites do). So could we then add the Anti-Tezeti article to the 'pedia? (note that I'm being facetious.)
• Delete. This isn't even noteable in the sphere of Neopets. -Aranel ("Sarah") 01:26, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• The grand finale: The current forums were made by Tezeti and are less sucessful, having only 26 members at the moment. They wouldn't be notable if they had ten times the number. One hundred times the number, and I might wake up. Non-notable. Delete. -- Hoary 07:45, 2005 Feb 20 (UTC)
• Keep: I only say this because I have cleaned up the article in question. It was too much like an advertisment. I do think the subject deserves an entry but not to the extent that it advertises other websitses. Wikipedia is not for that. I have no username at the moment, but i have made numerous positive additions to many articles involving the city of Vancouver. D.
  • Note that the above user has only six edits, five of which are in this VfD.
• Delete. A 28-user forum with less than 2000 posts is not notable --Carnildo 08:58, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Mikkalai 09:10, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Idea: the now cleaned up article would merge in great with the original Neopets article under contreversy. D. 9:21, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- Maybe once they kill a Neopet or two... Longhair 14:16, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Question: Why are only the "Keep" voters getting unsigned negative notes put under their name? Isn't this an attempt at POV? Besides, the number of edits they have made is not relevant to the voting process. Thank you for cleaning the article, though shouldn't it have the history of the movement as well? ---- unsigned comment from User:Tezeti

• Those aren't "negative votes", people are merely pointing out the history of the user. The number of edits they have made is very relevant to the voting process, as it is standard procedure here to allow the tallying administrator to discount the votes of new users if in his/her judgment these users appeared on Wikipedia merely to influence a particular vote and do nothing else. This applies to both keep and delete votes. Gamaliel 17:50, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. unencyclopaedic, lack of references, advertising suspicious & all reasons explained above. --Neigel von Teighen 17:55, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. I would like to point out that the forum and movement is growing considerabnly. One example is that it has gained two new users today, suggesting rapid growth. Also, regarding the above comment, there was never intended to be any advertising and I have removed all external links which could be interpreted as 'advertisements'. --Tezeti 02:21, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)
  • For comparison, a moderately active forum I'm on has 53,000 registered members, and as of right now (4 AM Eastern US time), has 219 people looking at the boards, and gained two members in the last five minutes. I consider this to be borderline notable. --Carnildo 09:03, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. -- pne 14:27, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. ComCat 08:42, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Oberiko 12:04, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Has legitimate information and is in sync with other articles. ...at 01:16, 2005 Feb 28, 70.178.75.237 forgot to press the twiddle key.

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.