Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GSGNC

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 speedy delete: the G11 tag applied to the page was valid. Nihiltres(t.l) 00:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GSGNC

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

Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. Conscious 10:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete - This group does not pass the notability guidelines for organizations (WP:CORP), and could even be tagged for speedy deletion (under criteria A7). Marasmusine 10:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - I have to repeat myself: "When I was much younger (~14) I also used to make up my own companies" (However I had the decency not to write Wikipedia articles about it). @hotmail E-Mail? Freehoster domain? Fails WP:CORP and WP:MADEUP definitely applies. I agree to speedy under A7. 1redrun Talk 11:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Made up. Seth Bresnett • (talk) 12:41, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. No notable company would ever give its CEO a Hotmail address. Fails WP:WEB as well as WP:CORP and WP:NFT. Its (unsupported) assertions of notability probably save it from an A7 speedy, but I'd tag it as spam if I thought it actually had any products to advertise. Iain99 12:45, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • No deletion; I suggest you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:GSGNC first. As mentioned, it is something which does provide services to people, without making a loss or profit whatsoever. It is there for fun and to show our talents which would otherwise be hidden. People actually dedicate time for it to produce astonishing results, and so really is a corporation (a group of people acting as a single entity, by definition). Cnpgs 16:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)cnpgs
  • I'm sure you find it fun, and good luck with it. However, just because someone enjoys something doesn't mean that it should have a Wikipedia article - Wikipedia is for notable subjects which are covered in reliable sources. If you'd like your site to have a Wikipedia article, I'm afraid you'll need to work on making it more famous first. Iain99 18:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • It's not just fun; besides being a proper corporation it is also popular, with over 3200 views on just one website; the videos have had nearly 50,000 views at the time of writing. With the same argument, why let pages of other companies here if they also have information on their websites?cnpgs 19:27, 22 August 2007 (UTC)cnpgs

Strong Delete This looks like nonsense. 70.21.254.188 18:39, 22 August 2007 (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.