Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OrthodoxWiki

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 keep. —Cleared as filed. 21:44, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] OrthodoxWiki

NN wiki. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 02:02, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep Over 1,300 articles and accelerating. CalJW 03:03, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep or merge. How many Orthodox wikis exist? -- JJay 03:23, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Being a wiki does not procure notability. --Apostrophe 05:19, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - A site's use of MediaWiki is irrelevant in determining notability. FCYTravis 07:00, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - Notable enough. I've went there and I think I've heard of it mentioned online several places.--T. Anthony 10:40, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep—I'm one of the project's sysops, so I'm biased (I still get to vote!), but I have heard it being talked about it a good bit even outside of the Internet. —Preost ^talk contribs 10:54, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Notability is not official Wikipedia policy, merely a guideline by which some but by no means all Wikipedians operate. The site exists and is verifiable. Jcuk 21:57, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Yes, notability is official Wikipedia Policy, Werdna648^T/_C\^@ 12:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Sorry but I cant see anything on that page that says anything about notability. Verifiability, yes, but not notability. Jcuk 17:26, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: Notability is a proposed Wikipedia policy. —Preost ^talk contribs 17:33, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Granted, but as of right now its only proposed policy.Jcuk 21:36, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. A well-maintained, informative place and with broad audience and editorship. Unlike the rest of wikicruft listed here it has notable context in wikipedia. mikka (t) 23:41, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, as per mikkalai. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep -- OrthodoxWiki isn't an obscure resource so its article shouldn't be deleted for allegedly being "non-notable". Critias 12:04, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not close to being notable, as based on WP:WEB. Traffic Rank for orthodoxwiki.org: 422,224 (not in top 10,000) [1]. 703 active users [2] (not over 5,000). No evidence that it has been the subject or national or international media attention. And having a few links from wikipedia doesn't demonstrate notable context. Agnte 17:39, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Heck, if Wookieepedia (Star Wars) can have it's own page, why can't this? Dumanov 01:28, 21 December 2005
• Delete nn.  Grue  15:00, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - Looks like a quality resource that can only become more notable in the future. --Pmsyyz 09:11, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• keep please this wiki is notable Yuckfoo 07:53, 28 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.