Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pure Pwnage

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep (no consensus to delete). Mindspillage (spill yours?) 15:13, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pure Pwnage

Internet 'TV show' made by two college students. Non-notable vanity. --InShaneee 19:45, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete unless some evidence of notability is produced. -- Antaeus Feldspar 19:52, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. The article merely states that this exists, rather than why it is notable. An internet 'TV show' is something rather easy to do if you can be bothered, so not automatically notable. Average Earthman 21:17, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • delete. anyone can produce their own show, like average earthman said, and their is no proof that this show is wildly popular. -anonymous IP user
  • Advertising. I agree with the above. Delete. (Naming a section "review" should give a hint). Mgm|(talk) 21:27, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, not notable, advert/promo. Megan1967 04:52, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, ego stroking self promotion. Unsigned vote by 67.140.145.26 (talk · contribs), who has five edits, only one of which is not to the article or to this VfD.
  • Don't delete, compared to topics like "badger badger badger" pure pwnage really deserves an article as it's a very professional show compared to many many others on the internet. Unsigned vote by Mtoman (talk · contribs), whose only edit is this vote.
  • Keep. Skimming google, it appears that this show is very well-covered on gaming websites. I'm not completely convinced it belongs, but it's an edge case and as a matter of principle I believe edge cases should be included. Demi T/C 04:01, 2005 Apr 11 (UTC)
  • Keep. In my opinion:
    • The article is a stub with potential. (See Deletion policy - table 'Problems that don't require deletion')
    • It is related to precedent: Is some Internet culture encyclopedic? - Yes. Gaming and Internet culture are quite intimately related, and this is apparent from the video series itself.
    • As Mtoman pointed out (in the unsigned vote above, nevertheless), the subject of this article is somewhat related to Red vs Blue.
    • The article might presently be seen as a Vanity page, however, as I pointed out above, the article is still a stub and is in need of expansion. As for the claims of 'non-notability', please see Does lack of fame a vanity article make?. Pure Pwnage (the video series) is primarily about gamers and the gaming subculture, however, since it is a parody, it can appeal to a much wider audience. (e.g. see Pure Pwnage Episode 2: Girls)
    • This is NOT a personal attack, merely a statement of fact. The VfD tagger has not viewed the video series that is the subject of this article (excerpt from #wikipedia on FreeNode, times are GMT +08:00):
      • Apr 11 12:02:09 <eleusis> InShaneee: have you watched the pure pwnage series?
      • [...]
      • Apr 11 12:02:21 <InShaneee> eleusis: can't say I have.
      • Apr 11 12:02:27 <eleusis> ok
    • As such, I believe the VfD listing is based on simple assumption relating to the current length of the article, rather than its potential. I also believe that InShaneee would not have VfD'd this article had he seen the video series, considering that he is familiar with the Red vs Blue series, and would have been aware of the parallels:
    • Answering other VfD voters' concerns:
      • The present form of the article does not make its notability apparent - as I pointed out, the article is still a stub in need of expansion.
      • The popularity of the video show is mostly irrelevant: Does lack of fame a vanity article make?.
      • The article is not simply promotion. For example, a term that is often used without explanation in the video series is 'Uber Micro'. This article is properly linked to explain this term.
      • Labelling this article as 'Advertising' because of the presence of a 'Review' section is irrelevant. This 'review' was not NPOV (negatively biased against the content of the video series) and was added by an anonymous user from IP 67.140.145.26. This review was removed by another anonymous user from IP 24.3.104.7, but then reverted back by 67.140.145.26. Notice that the anonymous user from 67.140.145.26 has also posted a Delete vote on this page. The review has since been moved to the Talk page.
    • In summary, I believe that Pure Pwnage has good potential for growth, being a good example of a Webisode. (The webisode article doesn't exist yet, try google for definitions and other examples. IMO, a webisode is a more general concept than a webcomic - something that Red vs Blue is classified as.) As evident from the article presently, the video series is relevant to the gamer subculture. However, a wider audience should be able to relate to the content of the video series, as it is a parody of gamers, not simply an obscure gamer-related publication.

Eleusis 06:49, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

  • Extreme Inclusion - Bah you deletionists Burgundavia 06:58, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep I LOLed AngryParsley 06:59, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm glad that Eleusis made a clear explanation, but unfortunately I don't find it particularly convincing. The article is conceivably vanity since it is written by people involved with the show. That is, of course, debatable as always, but it is valid grounds for voting. "Red vs Blue" gets over ten times as many google hits as "Pure Pwnage". Thus it does not follow that Pwnage is 'famous' simply because it is 'similar'. And it is pretty easy to create whatever kind of site on the net; Wikipedia is not a web directory. So I'd have to agree with the delete voters above. Radiant_* 09:18, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
As far as I know, there is no evidence to suggest that this article was written by, or has had most (or even, any) of its contributions coming from the cast or crew of Pure Pwnage, or anyone else affiliated with (read: helps run, or promotes) purepwnage.com. I was not implying that Pure Pwnage is as famous as Red vs Blue, merely that they were both parodies of the gaming subculture, and were both published in the form of 'webisodes'. (Indeed, I stated that fame is mostly irrelevant) Eleusis 09:47, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep. Well known movie. Grue 06:53, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete as vanity, the videos are unprofessionaly made. If they were a band they wouldn't be accepted on Wikipedia. Also Alexa rank of 138,580. bbx 12:04, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • The band that half of Internet knows about would certainly be accepted on Wikipedia. Similarly, an Internet phenomenon that is Pure Pwnage certainly deserves a mention in Wikipedia. The "vanity" argument is ridiculous in this case. Alexa rank for something that you can download from a dozen of sites and torrents is not very relevant too. Grue 14:26, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Take a look at http://www.onestat.com/aspx/reports.aspx?nav=i. I feel that the videos are popular enough and of a level of professional quality to be included in wikipedia. If the first episodes don't fit your definition of "quality" you should also watch the newer ones.Walton Simons
  • 'DEFINITLY' Keep Pure Pwnage is a sure example of artistic view and knowledge of the mind of pro gamers, along with comedy and information. It definitely should stay up as a source of information for the fans, like me, and many others. Unsigned vote by 24.156.25.92 (talk · contribs), who has only one edit.
  • Keep: This article is educational. It educates people on gamer culture as does the show. There is no self-promotion here, this article was produced by those that were enlightened by the show and feel a deep sense of satisfaction from the education they have received from the show. Unsigned vote by 82.133.100.157 (talk · contribs), who has just two edits.
  • Keep the show is a comedy but nevertheless a well made non-vulgar view into the world of gamers. Though not the best role model for kids, it is interesting to keep the article in the condition that it is kept in a good level of writing. -- Faerun 18:25, 19 Apr 2005

Faerun (talk · contribs) has three edits, all to the article or to this VfD.

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.