Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Demosphere

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. Kirill Lokshin 06:22, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Demosphere

This seems to be advertising, and is about a website that is not notable enough to merit a Wikipedia article ---Aude 15:03, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

• Alexa says no information, presumably because it is new; Google gives a respectable 451 results for 'Demosphere Schroder]. For now I vote keep and copyedit so it does not read like advertising, and watch like a hawk to check that the site does develop into something notable. It may go belly-up quite quickly, or it may thrive. But strip out all those pointless interwiki links to voting systems. David | Talk 15:10, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nomination. - Oldsoul is the primary author of this article. He/she had added this site as an external link to Canada, Alberta, and Edmonton, Alberta. I wouldn't have noticed thie article had it not been for the linkspam. ---Aude 15:16, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: The categories in this article were entered with a "|" and a space afterwards, in order to force this article (inappropriately) to the top of the category listings, which seems like a clear attempt at promotion or advertising. --Kevin Myers | on Wheels! 18:51, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Also, Oldsoul removed the article for deletion notice. --Kevin Myers | on Wheels! 08:59, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Looks like advertising. --Carnildo 23:55, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

I know that it says not to modify this page, however I'm not sure where the "appropriate discussion page" is. I think this was far too speedy of a deletion, and especially because the votes were essentially 2-1, when I of course would have also voted to keep it, that would have made it 2-2. "Looks like advertising" is not nearly as strong an arguement as the hits on google (400+). This was deleted because "Demosphere.net" is simply not as big a site as say, Indymedia.org. But where do we draw that line? There are many many regional Indymedia.org sites which are barely active and yet Indymedia has a strong article presence on wikipedia.org.

Given that this project had garnered press on both wikinews and indymedia.org, I think it's fair to say that Demosphere deserves an article on wikipedia as well. As far as the categorization mark-up, I had no knowledge as to the effects of including the "|" separator beyond the stylisitc effect which I've seen on other pages.

Instead of deleting this article I think those who voted for a deletion should have made an effort to improve the NPOV, which given the effort put into it by myself and other colleagues, had been achieved, but obviously could have been improved upon.

I'm not sure if there's any way to retrieve the article, if not to re-instate it based on my defense here, but then at least to move it to a personal temp page. Thank you for your time and understanding. Oldsoul 22:02, 6 November 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.