Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Photoshop tennis

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 / No deletion, but the two articles should be merged somehow, possibly to an altogether new title such as "Competitive and collaborative photoshopping" or "Photoshopping pastimes" or just merge to Photoshopping. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-18 09:39Z

[edit] Photoshop tennis

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

Edit war over notability by an IP and a user. IP wanted to redirect to Photoshop contest, user wanted to keep separate. I'm concerned about notability, so I'm reverting and listing it for AfD, to see if it's a valid stand-alone article (I doubt it, one mention in Wired doesn't seem very notable), should be redirected, or purely deleted. -Wooty Woot? contribs 22:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• Keep Keep or Merge - I'm the "user" maintaining that it is notable, so I weigh in with a Keep. For the record, a Google search of "photoshop tennis" "Photoshop Tennis" "Photoshop tennis" -wikipedia gives 149,000 hits, as of my last search. Nihiltres 23:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete or Merge with photoshop contest. Not enough notability for a stand-alone article (Google hits by themselves are not enough to indicate notability). This is a type of photoshop contest, and since both articles are short, there's no need for the sub-type to have its own article. In this case, one substantial article is better than two skimpy ones. Stebbins 23:17, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, merging may be a good idea... and Google hits are an indication of notability to a certain extent, since most photoshop tennis is carried out through a web site. Nihiltres 02:05, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

• Merge with photoshop contest, for Stebbins's reasons and because this is a well-written stub that could add a lot to photoshop contest, an article that's mostly a list of "some of the most oft-used clichés." --Martinship 07:19, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

• keep There appears to be a clear difference between Pcontest and Ptennis.

Pcontest is a photo which a bunch of people can edit... as a contest.

Ptennis is when users incrementally add to a photo, passing it back and forth.

I think a story writing contest Vs story which people take turns to add a sentence, is analogous to this article comparison.Bouncingmolar 10:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Refer to the definition of "contest". Ptennis is a competitive activity, and therefore can be called a contest. Stebbins 13:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

In that case, should soccer, real tennis, or basketball be referred to as "contests"? It is unreasonable to overgeneralize a competitive activity as a contest, since the word "contest" generally carries the implicit idea that it is parallel in execution. In this case, the article Photoshop contest directly refers to a contest in the context of concurrent submissions: "The contest usually asks users to edit the picture in a humorous way, or according to a specific theme. The users then go away and edit the image to the requirements and post their results to the site." Photoshop tennis is executed alternatively, as referenced in the article: "The players pick a starting image, then one player makes some sort of alteration to the image in any graphics manipulation package that they like. They then send their altered image, usually via email (though posting the image to a Photoshop tennis forum is another possibility), to the other player, who then edits that image and sends it back to the first player. This process goes back and forth [...]". Given this evidence, it should be clear that Photoshop tennis must not be generalized in a manner that suggests that it is parallel in execution. Nihiltres 17:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

• Keep I agree with the previous opinion that while a Pcontest and Ptennis are definitely related, the difference between the two is important enough to merit separate articles. Metavida 06:19, 18 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.