Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ROFL Attack

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was Delete --Allen3 ^talk July 4, 2005 23:32 (UTC)

[edit] ROFL Attack

For the prior VFD discussion of Roflcopter see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Roflcopter. For a discussion of potentially expanding the speedy deletion criteria to include speedily deleting material that is re-created during a VfD vote, see Wikipedia:Deletion policy/Reducing VfD load.

This is a non-notable internet game (approx. 800 google hits), possibly created as advertising. This article was created in response to the VFD discussion of Roflcopter, which see for background information. Xoloz 05:58, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, Flash vanity, advertising. — JIP | Talk 06:04, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete advertising. JamesBurns 08:07, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. You beat me to it, although I would have listed it under the rationale of wanting a clearer sign of consensus before deleting outright content that's already been listed for deletion. BTW, if this passes, remember that roflcopter is now a candidate for speedy deletion. — Phil Welch 09:13, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Conversely, if the consensus here is to keep, it may be worth considering merging the edit history of roflcopter beneath ROFL Attack, thereby fixing the copy&paste move. Uncle G 12:00, 2005 Jun 22 (UTC)
• Keep, roflcopter gets 17,400 google hits. Kappa 09:26, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • This article is ROFL Attack. Uncle G 10:31, 2005 Jun 22 (UTC)
    • But Roflcopter will be deleted if this article is. Kappa 14:11, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • roflcopter has already been discussed, and the argument to keep it lost. Uncle G 18:59, 2005 Jun 22 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable flash animation. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 11:29, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, [lame] extension of previous [lame] joke animation game. Not notable and no potential to become encyclopedic. Kappa should research and vote on current topic instead of almost-unrelated topic that inspired this one. Barno 14:03, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • The survival of information on roflcopter depends on the survival of this article. Kappa 14:31, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • That's true, but it appears very little, if anything, of Roflcopter lives on in this. My nom., at least, and many of the votes, I gather, also reflect the thinking that the redirect was not useful. Xoloz 01:19, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• I'll borrow two WTFbombs from the game and say- how is this even in here? Delete. --Scimitar 14:19, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - roflcopter only survived in the first place due to sockpuppetry Proto 14:42, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not encyclopedic. Radiant_>|< 15:15, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete for the lack of notability. Nestea 15:45, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not for an encycolpedia. .:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish 18:57, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. I wish we had a Game project. Say, Wikigamopedia. It might someday be bigger than ... well... Wikipedia (who knows). hydnjo talk 01:32, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Even though I voted for keeping ROFLCopter, I think that the ROFLcopter article pretty much covers this game as this is the ROFLcopter game... Pretty much a useless page. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 05:04, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete: I thought that this would be a sure loser, but I thought ROFLcopter was, too. Now I see that it was kept. Apparently, it takes 99% or better delete to delete something, so I'd better vote. Geogre 05:09, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep or redirect to LOL or some equivalent. --Badlydrawnjeff 15:07, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep The game is notable.  Grue  15:59, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • And Keep in the strongest terms possible the history of Roflcopter, since there was no consensus for its deletion.  Grue  16:08, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • The admin did not rule that there was no consensus in Roflcopter -- he stated plainly that he was invoking his discretion. Xoloz 18:17, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable game. And nuke the Roflcopter redirect while you're at it. --Calton | Talk 01:29, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, while not part of common knowledge, even to people who frequent the internet, like many words on the internet slang page, it is well known within the Gamer Community. Brekk 1:20, 24 June 2005
  • Improperly signed and improperly placed comment by 24.2.249.2. Moved to proper place on page also. Xoloz 06:38, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, this whole LMAONADE, ROFLCOPTER, etc. stuff is definitely well known and I've seen it quoted in many places. This game was mostly responsible for bringing this extension to common internet acronyms to the masses. Perhaps edit the article to mention? — (Unsigned comment by 131.215.158.170; user's 5th edit.)
• Keep, I clicked on it because I wanted to know more about it. Why delete it then? Is this Wikicult? — (Unsigned comment by 35.11.210.84; user's 1st edit.)
• Keep, it's an important aspect of forum culture. — (Unsigned comment by 209.89.225.205; user's 1st edit.)
• Delete. Roflcopter may have been notable. This is not by itself. Superm401 | Talk July 2, 2005 16:10 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section.