Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ceiling server

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 --JForget 00:17, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ceiling server

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

Evidently this is a slang term to describe an illegitimate gaming server run within a school, thought up by a few people. It's clearly not notable here. Its' only references are a forum post and a Digg link. Almost all of it reads like an instruction manual. Much as I love the concept itself (stealthy rebellion?), a term thought up among a few friends is not worthy of a Wikipedia article. SMC (talk) 13:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I think this is a genius idea and should be kept. It is something he has invented, and I feel his invention should be noted whether common or rare.

I think the article should stay, this is a serious project We will constantly add new information about ceiling servers. Please give us sometime since the article is very new!

/Jaomi

  • Yes, perhaps you are serious about it Jaomi, but it is not notable enough for inclusion. To be notable enough for inclusion in wikipedia, it has to have recieved coverage by reliable, third party sources such as newspapers, large websites, books, television. This hasn't. Have a read over Wikipedia:Notability.--Jaeger123 (talk) 14:30, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete and Comment: I agree with Jaeger123 here, I really don't find it notable enough for the Wiki. But great idea, though. THE KC (talk) 14:45, 12 April 2008 (UTC).
  • Delete. I do like the idea very much, but unfortunately cool ideas that haven't been reported on by independent sources pretty much fall foul of WP:NOR. If you can give us some sources that show this term/concept being used by reliable sources I will happily vote keep, but right now it doesn't look that way. ~ mazca talk 16:36, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

- Jaomi´s Comment- Okay, It seems that you want proof that it really exist. If i can give you those proofs, can the article stay?

I also understand there might not be anykind if common intresst in what I did. But also, it´s a pretty cool thing i don´t think many others done before me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaomi (talk • contribs) 17:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete as a perfect example of non-notable things that were made-up in school one day. Bfigura (talk) 22:37, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete searched for it's use but only found on a forum. Nothing to show that it is a notable item for an encyclopedia. I've no doubt that it exists, my stale bread is in the trash can, but that is not notable either. SunCreator (talk) 22:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep as a perfect example of human ingenuity. There's no information on these because there's no central place for said information. — 86.3.234.71 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete. Clever, resourceful, and absolutely non-notable. --Craw-daddy | T | 23:18, 14 April 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.