Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CSFBL

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Notability has not been established. Fabrictramp (talk) 23:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CSFBL

CSFBL (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

This article fails to meet Wikipedia's notability guideline. This is an online game hosted by an individual in his basement. While at first glance the article appears well-referenced, a closer inspection reveals the article consists of nearly all original research using webarchives of the site, blogs, and even CSFBL's own forums as sources. This clearly makes this article fail the notability guideline. Quite simply, CSFBL has not received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Quartet 19:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete, no attribution of notability to independent and credible sources. --Dhartung | Talk 20:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep, it references several independent sources, if you'll notice. The blogs are not associated with the site in any way. And they assert its notability. Smartyllama (talk) 21:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, per nom. In addition is should be noted that a primary contributor to the article, User:Bdemarzo appears to be the individual who created this game (possible WP:COI). Also, the sources noted above (there is one blog not associated with the site in the references - AndrewKoch.com), is not a reliable source as it's a self published source - see WP:SPS.--Yankees76 (talk) 21:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment The fact that it references SPS does not make it non-notable. The article explains its notability. Smartyllama (talk) 18:42, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Reply Because the article explains why the individual who edited/created the article believes "CSFBL" to be notable does not make it notable. There are no reliable sources for any of the information in this article - only the main contributor's original research. Per Wikipedia's policy on Verifiability, "If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." As was noted above, blogs are not considered reliable sources. Sorry but in my opinion this article should still be deleted. --Yankees76 (talk) 18:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete: This is a slam dunk. Zero reliable sources, zero independent sources, only 67 unique G-hits [1]. I'm sure there are people who enjoy this game, but that doesn't make it notable.  RGTraynor  16:47, 9 May 2008 (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.