Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RebelForums.org

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 no consensus - Izehar 16:45, 27 December 2005 (UTC) Per WP:IAR I'm reopening this decision. I count 7 delete votes to 2 non-meat keep votes. Discounting single-digit-edit-count users is well within parameters for ballot-box-stuffing. 7-2. That's a consensus. Article is deleted. FCYTravis 09:02, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RebelForums.org

Yet another non-notable bulletin board made up of WP:NOR vios and fancruft. Delete. karmafist 23:44, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete Has an Alexa Rank of 4,876,900, which is actually worse that the Alexa rank of my personal website. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:50, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
    • It’s worse than mine too, which is 671,505—and is not particularly notable. •DanMS 04:24, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom: pointless and self-promoting --VT hawkeyetalk to me 03:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete and don't forget images - 165 registered members. Cool logo though. Renata3 03:58, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • keep. Googled Rebel Alliance Forums, found it ok. Anti-establishment 13:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment User's 620th edit. --ParkerHiggins ( talk contribs ) 07:14, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
      • What exactly are you doing? He has 620 edits, so? You only have 373. --Revolución (talk) 20:15, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep It. The board is unique in the way it is managed and operated. Its growing steadily and people are commonly interested in its history and operation. It deserves to be more than a petty subsection of che-lives. Gent
    • Comment User's 6th Edit. [1]. karmafist 18:41, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep It. The Rebel Alliance Forums have only been operating for a short time and will surely grow in due time. If we keep the article on Wiki, more people will become aware of the site and help it grow even further. As Gent pointed out, we deserve to be more than a sub-section of Che-lives. Makaveli
    • Comment User's 3rd Edit [2]. He put in this edit under 172.188.121.205. karmafist 18:42, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • keep it, it's informative, it's a place for people to discuss their ideas and it's innovatively run. it's growing in numbers every day and has plenty of potential that people have the right to access to information about it. —the preceding unsigned comment is by 88.111.206.225 (talk • contribs) 18:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep It. Rebel Alliance is a young board, but one that is growing. It is indeed unique in it's management, and the democratic nature of it's member participation. The constant attempts to malign the board are tiresome, and more than a little sad, really. Regardless of people's personal opinions/history - the last thing the left needs is fewer voices and forums for discussion. Attempting to have Rebel Alliance deleted from Wiki is foolish, vindictive, and counterproductive. Keep it. User:por ahora —the preceding unsigned comment is by Por ahora (talk • contribs) 19:14, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep --Revolución (talk) 20:11, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Unencyclopedic forum with an article full of stupid Message Board Drama (tm). FCYTravis 03:57, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Weak delete - Recommended purely due to my own personal hatred of sockpuppetry. Daykart 05:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. nn (My 3,676th edit) --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 05:56, 27 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.