Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Besttechie

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. And let the records state that I freaking hate sockpuppets used to fuck with VfD. Redwolf24 00:51, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Besttechie

Promotion of a website. (nominated by User:67.65.4.20)

• Vote - Pierce: Keep (User:Pierce)
• Vote - MistaMatt90: Keep (User:MistaMatt90)
• Vote - Jeff: Keep (User:24.186.98.203)
• Vote - Admiraljustin: Keep (second edit ever by User:Admiraljustin)
• Vote - Brett: Keep (User:Brett5150)
• Vote - Robroy: Keep ((User:Robroy)
• Vote - Murtu52: "Keep"
• Vote - rv56: Keep (Unsigned vote by 64.201.202.59 (talk · contribs))
• Vote - Keep

• Comment. Above votes by MistaMatt90 (10 prior contribs), 24.186.98.203 (first contrib) and Admiraljustin (second contrib). Only 900-1000 Google references outside of the site itself--Gabriel Beecham/Kwekubo 01:52, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Comment It's funny; I've never seen anyone ever vote by writing "Vote - (username): (user's vote)" before, and now suddenly six people, all voting the same way, do it all at once. Curious. JDoorjam 14:10, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

• Just a thought. Perhaps users of the forums in question alerted via a post and not knowing the "non-rigourous" format of a vote, just followed the example of the first submission? --Ikester 03:58, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

• This kind of thing is mentioned in WP:SOCK, under Meatpuppets. --Etacar11 05:01, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

• Comment. This article is no different than Tech Support Forum (User:MistaMatt90)

• Which has been taken down and redirected to Besttechie. --Ikester 03:58, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

• Delete nn. Dottore So 02:02, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep
• delete That similar site is 40x larger. lots of issues | leave me a message 02:22, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete; nn, adv | Celcius 02:28, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - as per everyone else who is sane. - Hahnchen 02:33, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and ignore the socks. ESkog 02:39, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, perfectly useless. Nandesuka 03:06, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Vote - blim: Keep (User:24.231.229.250)

• Delete -Eisnel 05:17, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Sock supported article on non-notable website. Capitalistroadster 05:30, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, ban support hosiery, reset all Wikimedia servers and salt the earth. This is just useless. - Lucky 6.9 05:51, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Vote - tg1911: Keep

Above vote is by anon User:66.82.9.32.

• Delete, Alexa rank is 1,514,746; 700 members is common for forums and page used to link several times to the same domain before I removed those links. Advertising. - Mgm|^(talk) 07:54, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Sliggy 10:45, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Small forum. Punkmorten 11:24, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. "Sockpuppet limit has been reached and exceeded". --Scimitar ^parley 13:48, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, NN. And there are enough socks in here to keep wiki's toes warm for a month. JDoorjam 14:10, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Keep"Good, helpfull site" Makai (User:139.55.226.118)

• Delete because "30000" really should have a comma in it (e.g. 30,000). -- BD2412 ^talk 17:58, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete wow, that's a tough standard BDA, please feel free to never check my edits. Sock puppets where it hurts them. Alf 20:21, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - All the sockpuppets are enough reason, not to mention the non-notability. DomRem | Yeah? 22:01, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete nn con sock puppets. --Etacar11 22:41, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete --PhilipO 22:52, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

• Vote - R. fiend: Delete (R. fiend)
• Delete. Can't resist a sockpuppeted vote. -Splash 02:24, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
• Brrrrr. Delete, NN --Raistlin 15:54, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

• Keep ... unless someone can explain the criteria here. How big must a site be to make it worthy of mention at WikiPedia? Has that been defined? How does one decide it's merely advertizing? I mean, how does a WikiPedia visitor know what's out there to help them if such sites are all considered to be advertizing? --Ikester 03:48, 22 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.