Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coffee Lounge Forums

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 of the debate was delete. Yeah, I'm not counting the anons who just breezed in to complain about their website not getting an article. How'd you guess? fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 15:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Coffee Lounge Forums

nn forum site novacatz 12:50, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

It is a discussion forum which has a certain amount of history, even in its short lifespan, that would mean it is appropriate for it to have a Wikipedia entry. It complies with the Wikipedia merits of allowed entry. Anon User 12:03, 18th December 2005 (AEDST)

Note guidelines in WP:WEB. The forum does not seem notable enough to meet those guidelines for inclusion. novacatz 14:17, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete; not notable, as per above. A website advertising itself via wikipedia. 10:29, 19 December 2005 (AEDST)

This article shouldn't be deleted, because its relation to Whirlpool and the incidents that resulted in the creation of the site are very noteworthy. However in it's current form this article is horrible. The current article just looks like an add for the site. But a page about the whole fight between the whirlpool mods and travey leading to the creation of this website would be very notable -(unknownsoldier)--138.217.42.127 04:41, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete - Nobody cares who argued with who to create somebody's forum. Forum politics are generally boring, stupid and hopelessly unencyclopedic. FCYTravis 07:43, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Do Not Delete - Saying Nobody cares who argued with who, IS an ignorant comment to make, especially when it may come from someone who is not even a member of Whirlpool Australian Broadband Discussion forums or even Coffee Lounge forums. Whirlpool used to include a coffee lounge and the Coffee Lounge Forums website is a spawn from many members of Whirlpool. The website eventually gained the permission from Simon Wright and the point of the entry is that this site became news when it was on the verge of being sued for copyright infringement. It was only through public discussion that the Coffee Lounge Forums website remains and it also remains a part of the extended Whirlpool Community.- AusLeo (Whirlpool Member)

Do Not Delete - Wikipedia is a world thing, not just an american website, therefore it should have entries about websites based in other countries allowed on it without people who have no idea about the website or history of it saying it shouldnt be on here because no one cares. Whirlpool who is the main webforum which Coffee Lounge Forums is a off topic part of it is the main website Australians use to find the best internet service for them. Whirlpool is also in the Australian media a lot as well. And I think for someone to say "nobody cares" who doesnt even know either website or what they are about is a little obnoxious dont you think? Ok sure the entry needs to be written in a more constructive manner and also with correct grammar and spelling and so on, but has no one ever heard the saying work in progress?-(toiletduck)-

  • Delete unexeceptional website.--nixie 03:53, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge at the very most, possibly as an addendum to Whirlpool (website) or the like. Has some amount of history, so I'm reluctant to flat-out delete it, though in its current state it is definitely not up to Wikipedia standards. --Hotchy 07:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete fails WP:WEB, influenced by the sackload of sock puppet/unsigned votes. Stifle 02:39, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, though merging with the site mentioned by Hotchy would be OK if someone cares enough to do it. Halcatalyst 22:35, 22 December 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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.