Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GayRomeo
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 keep. Sources do not have to be in English. It should also be noted that there has been an article on the subject at German Wikipedia (i.e. the language the sources are in) since June 2005, which is far more detailed and may be of assistance in improving the coverage here. WjBscribe 00:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GayRomeo
This article has been here for almost a year, it is still a stub, possibly doesn't meet web notability requirements, has no english language sources beyond the commercial website of the subject of the article and the article itself reads more like a guide/lightly-worded advertisement for the site more than being encyclopedic. Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 17:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Does not appear to be notable. --- RockMFR 21:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Withdrawing my opinion. I'd prefer if I could actually read a translation of the German articles linked in this article (rather than bad machine translations), but overall I'm not too picky about foreign-language sources here. However, if this comes up at afd again, it really needs to have English sources. --- RockMFR 20:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep: Clearly notable, by far the largest gay online community in the German-speaking countries (where Gaydar (website) is really, really small fish and communities like OUTeverywhere are virtually unheard of). Hard to give exact figures because this service is free and the others are commercial (i.e. one would have to pay just to find out how many people are actually there), but just to give an example: right now, at this moment, about 700 people online at OUTeverywhere, compared to 22300 online at Gayromeo. Total number of registered Gayromeo users, worldwide: over 450000 (and they do automatically delete users that haven't been online for 5 or 6 months). — PDD 22:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: It would help the case of this article if there were secondary sources (preferrably in english since this is the english wikipedia) that establish its notability. Also aside from that, the content of the article is severely lacking and amounts to an advertisement. Unless it can be fixed up and expanded so it is a full encyclopedic reference in the near future, it should probably be deleted, notable or not. It can be recreated once there is enough content to at least justify a stub. -Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 22:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: Totally agreed, the article isn't good. I just tried to give some information to show that non-notability doesn't apply, but of course information like that should be in the article and not on the AfD page. — PDD 22:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - No assertion of notability.--Bryson 03:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Strong keep The leading gay chat portal in the German-speaking world, it has been the subject of "multiple and non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself." The articles about this chat portal in Spiegel and tageszeitung are linked and satisfy the notability criteria. Therefore the allegations of non-notability are false and the call for deletion is unfounded.--Bhuck 07:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per nom ZBrannigan 08:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep As far as I see, the site clearly matches Notability criteria #1 as it has been written about in many newspapers. Moreover, Gayromeo has become an important communication resource for gay people in the German speaking parts of Europe, and I know from my personal use that it's rapidly growing in the neigbour countries.--DrMurx 13:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. It meets notability requirements - at least in German-speaking regions. We can not expect that everything Spiegel article will be translated into English. The site has tried sprading outside of the German-speaking region, and is doing so, albeit slowly. samwaltz 17:03, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- Another Comment. As I've stated, I agree that this site may be notable, but the article doesn't support that well and needs to be massively expanded/fundamentally rewritten. If there are no english language sources, then so be it. But if this article is to remain, there need to be people willing to put some work into it to improve it. It has been sitting around as a stub that looks more like an advertisement/brochure than anything else for a year. Simply being notable is not enough. The article needs to properly assert this notability and provide encyclopedic content. -Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 18:05, 30 March 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.
