Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cgtalk

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 of the debate was delete both articles. Mailer Diablo 07:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CGSociety and Cgtalk

Web site and non-notable web forum, seems to be a part of a Ballistic Media astroturfing effort by User:Ericmachmer, delete.--Peta 06:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

• The CGWebcrap and their CGManifesto should be CGDeleted. Opabinia regalis 06:33, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for not immediately deleting the page. For what it is worth I don't work for Ballistic Media and this article isn't astroturfing. As a digital artist I appreciate the CGSociety and would like to encourage the work they have done to promote digital artists. The CGTalk article has been up for quite a long time. (I did not start the entry.) Why would either be an inappropriate?? There are articles on Yahoo! and many other websites and publishing houses, as well as of course art movements. The CGSociety is an important institution for digital artists. This article is most definitely not an advertisement. If you find advertising text within it, please remove it -- not the entire article. The CGSociety to my mind is a modern online version of the Salon des Refuses or similar forum for artists. It has a very real impact upon the art world today and deserves notice in Wikipedia. Please do not delete this article. Thank you. User:Ericmachmer

• No, why don't you remove the advertising material, instead of leaving it up to someone else to clean up after you. You can start with "It's fun. It's cool. It's who we are." Delete unless several external references are provided, and the advertising content is removed. GeorgeStepanek\^talk 08:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete advertising and not notable michaelCurtis ^talk+ _{contributions} 09:42, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. And then delete again. -- GWO

• Okay the section previously marked "Manifesto" has been deleted and I've toned down "enthusiasm" for the CGScociety. This is the first article I've posted, sorry to have asked you to clean it up...just had thought that in a section marked "Manifesto" it would be okay for less objective statements. By external references, what do you mean? Ericmachmer 14:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
  • By external references I mean independent, third-party citations from newspapers or other major media. If this is truly notable then someone, somewhere must have written an article about it. GeorgeStepanek\^talk 23:03, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Advertising. When this becomes more talked about, perhaps recreate. Xyrael ^T 16:25, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks Xyrael

• Hey thanks a lot Xyrael for not immediately trashing my first attempt at writing a Wiki article. Really appreciate it that you took the time to send me the useful info on how to improve this...if I just work on the /Temp page would that be okay? It would be great to be able to refer other cg artists to a page they would be also able to enhance. Thanks again for not just refering to my efforts as "CGCrap" or "Delete. And then delete again." Sheesh, give some people authority and it goes right to their heads. You exemplify what makes Wikipedia a friendly welcoming online community. Sorry to have taken your time -- thanks so much again! Ericmachmer 18:15, 1 June 2006 (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.