Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phoenix Dollar

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 of the debate was delete. --Ezeu 09:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Phoenix Dollar

  ATTENTION!

If you came to this page because a friend asked you to do so, or because you saw a message on an online forum asking you to do so, please note that the deletion process is designed to determine the consensus of opinion of Wikipedia editors; for this reason comments from users whose histories do not show experience with or contributions to Wikipedia, and particularly, to this article, are traditionally given less weight and may be discounted entirely by the closing Administrator.

You are not barred from participating in the discussion, or making your opinion known here, no matter how new you may be, and we welcome reasoned opinions and rational discussion based upon our policies and guidelines. However, ballot stuffing is pointless. There is no ballot to stuff, because decisions are not made upon weight of numbers alone. This is a place to ascertain the consensus of the Wikipedia community. Please review Wikipedia:Deletion policy for more information.

Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing!


Recreation of content previously at Phoenix (currency), which was deleted as advertising and replaced with a redirect to something unrelated. Subject matter is a non-notable private "currency" which hopes to replace the US Dollar following the dollar's collapse (WP:NOT a crystal ball). Until said event takes place, the currency in question is non-notable, being something that only a very small special interest group is even aware of (WP:Cruft). Google news search on "Phoenix Dollar" results in only one hit, a reference to a probably unrelated mutual fund. This article could also be construed as linkspam. ergot 18:13, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete as nom. ergot 18:16, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as crufty nonsense per nom. RGTraynor 18:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as nom, looks like spam/ego page Pontificake 19:42, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable currency. --Several Times 20:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom --Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 12:36, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep This article is a Stub and wikipedia supports stub entries so that they may be expanded at a later time. We fully intend to expand this page to incude much data about what metal backed currencies are in general. We are now working on getting this done and we ask that you allow us enough space to improve the listing to be informative in a general way rather than just a stub as it stands now. The thoughts put forth above are not valid points. The Phoenix does not intend to replace the US Dollar and has never stated such a thing. That is a bold faced lie with the intent to harm the reputation of a solid private silver currency with thousands of clients. Also, noting that the currency is small is no reason not to allow a page for such a service. If the page is spam then I concede, but there is nothing wrong with having a page for a currency that is issued by private parties and wikipedia should support free market money. I also note that searching google pulls many results. You said google news which has no bearing on the merit of a business. Google does not determine a companies future and also is not a basis for judging a business or idea. It should be able to stand on facts and not search results. I suggest keeping the entry but expand it to include more data about what a private silver backed currency actually is and make it more informative. I would be happy to do that and will add to this article shortly.Fredhandlive 16:03, 5 May 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep I don't think it would be a good precedent to decide whether something should be included in Wikipedia based upon whether it has a high Google news position! That is a really disturbing idea to me--that one group could on wikipedia could decide that another group's interests aren't important enough because they don't make the news! This is a stub, and isn't particularly helpful yet, but it's not advertising anything, and as the poster above pointed out, stubs are supported by wikipedia. Also, the argument against this entry sounds a lot more like editorializing than the stub itself. I think perhaps this person has a vested interest? Also, there doesn't seem to be anything in the article about replacing US currency. Has that been removed already--because I tend to agree that the critique is a bit over the top. Anyway, just looks like a stub to me--why not see if those interested in it can expand it into something useful, then revisit this issue? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.13.130 (talk • contribs)
  • Comment please vote only once. ergot 03:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC) --Sorry, I'll compile. 71.35.13.130 19:27, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Were this a local currency, I would not be at all opposed to keeping it. Unfortunately, it is a non-notable private currency which has not yet attracted enough attention to merit mention in an encyclopedia, hence my listing of it for deletion. ergot 02:17, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep "No intelligent idea can gain general acceptance" "If people are free in any meaningful sense of the word, that means they are at liberty to foul up their lives as much as make something grand of them. That's the gamble we all take. That's the risk of liberty." Who are these people to dictate deletion, that the community i feel at liberty with are crafty nonsense, non-notable currency. If it is a non-notable then i am a non-notable entity who uses this currency for my own personal dealings with other community members. i noticed they give to children's charities, i do not see other non-notable companies doing the same. They have every right at having a mark on history in my opinion, every entity in this life makes up a whole for history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.9.16.77 (talk • contribs)
  • Delete per Several Times, flood of socks. Stifle (talk) 00:06, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nominator. Also, sockpuppets on an AFD is never a good idea. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 00:06, 9 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.