Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OCAU

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 no consensus. NSLE _(T+C) at 05:05 UTC (2006-05-25)

[edit] OCAU

This article seems to be a advertisment and may possibly border on vanity by the creator, but the site is visited by a large amount of users regularly, with a large user base. Candidate for a clean-up more likely, but neutral on this. No Vote --Arnzy ^{(whats up?)} 13:45, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

ATTENTION! If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}

• It sucks as is, but the site is rather popular and this seems to be the term people use for it. 14,500 alexa, fair amount of googles. Maybe it should be merged somewhere though... Yet another lame sig I came up with ^{T | @ | C} 14:10, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep on basis of nominator's evaluation of "a large user base". I've cleaned it up. See WP:Vanity: "vanity by itself is not a basis for deletion, but lack of importance is ". Tyrenius 17:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment The article was prodded as a speedy earlier, but was not a speedy candidate, thus brought it here to afd. --Arnzy ^{(whats up?)} 22:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep On the basis that its more than just a crappy one line article. It has more info now plus a picture. Waynejkruse10
• Keep This article can still be improved upon, but it's decent now, and I believe it should be kept. ShaunES 02:31, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Agg's advertising his own site —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.5.134 (talk • contribs)

• Comment It was my idea to write a article about OCAU for wikipedia and Agg was just the one that implemented it. And why on earth would OCAU need advertising? - Waynejkruse10

• Delete. Where is the evidence of this "large user base"? Zaxem 06:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Screenshot is [1] stating the amount of members. Note: requires sign-up to the actual site to see statistics.. --Arnzy ^{(whats up?)} 06:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep OCAU has received numerous Hitwise Top 10 rankings for being a popular Computer and Hardware News provider. It just needs to be expanded on to be more informative. I dont see it as being any different to other similar articles. --210.84.5.250 13:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep OCAU does have a large userbase and is well-known, in Australian PC tech circles at least, so borderline notable. I am not a member of OCAU myself, but most members of Whirlpool (website) (an unrelated Australian broadband forum that appears to be deemed WP-worthy) would know who/what "OCAU" refers to whether or not they are members themselves, and OCAU is regularly cited as an alternate and useful resource for computer-related information and advice. I expect/assume that OCAU would have more non-Australian members than Whirlpool does. Paddles 15:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:WEB. Stifle (talk) 22:37, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep OCAU Seems to be a large community base and this does not seem to be advertising it, even though the site does NOT need advertising..... it can be an informative infomation base —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.214.51.123 (talk • contribs)
• Weak keep they indeed are quite known at folding@home -Yyy 08:31, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, nn forums.--Peta 02:54, 25 May 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.