Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simtropolis (3rd nomination)

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 delete. Using directories and links as proof of notability for a website is analogous to using a phone book and the classified ads to prove notability for a person. No reliable sources about the subject have been presented. The forum thread linked mentioned a four page spread in PC Gamer UK, but they couldn't find it or cite it.-Wafulz 12:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Simtropolis

ATTENTION! If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username|UTC timestamp [optional]}}

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

Fails WP:WEB. Claims to be largest fansite in its area, but fails to back up that claim with reliable sources. Previous AfDs closed as No consensus, and Keep when the only Keep arguments were I like it. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 19:18, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, fails WP:WEB. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?)} 19:36, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - First, I am gong to say in advance it has been established before that a merger of this into another article (such as SimCity 4) is not appropriate - so if this article is removed it should be a simple deletion. Next, before this AfD was started I was beginning a re-wright of the article which aimed to address the concerns and to eventually replace the existing article - I might continue to work on this. However, the existing article fails WP:WEB and WP:V so I have no objections to deletion. Camaron1 | Chris 19:58, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, fails WP:WEB. I have tried to find any reliable, independent sources that discuss the subject, but have been unsuccessful. Jakew 22:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. For one, the article was severely cut before AFD, and these folks have had a significant say in the development of SimCity Societies. TheListUpdater 01:59, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per lack of notability. Also opposed to merging fan site-cruft into the articles about the topic. Corpx 06:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Note The site has already been notified of this AfD and has begun canvassing for keep votes. ([1]) --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 15:47, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, fails WP:WEB. --Fredrick day 16:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep If we have an article on other fansites, what's wrong with this one? --User:Simfan34 17:03, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

_{You can call this canvassing, but I am a member and have made several edits.}

Other articles exist is not a policy based reason for this artice to remain - as it current stands it does not have a single reference. --Fredrick day 17:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (web). --- RockMFR 18:00, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  
• Delete. It isnt notable enough and does not even have sources...maybe another time. BTW, Simtropolis actually posted on their website asking people to support the page. Yes, I am a member of ST (Username is JCarter) but I am opposed to keeping the page. Jgcarter 19:04, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Simtropolis has over 180,000 registered users, and it's not notable enough? Willy888 20:34, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Then those 180,000 people need to redo the page with reliable sources. Jgcarter 20:44, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep sometimes guidelines like WP:WEB just don't cut it. Rules are made to be broken, etc. It's an extremely large, popular, and well-trafficked site. Lots of crufty crap should be flushed but this isn't cruft. It's a large enough subject that to not have an article would make Wikipedia remiss. SchmuckyTheCat

• So what you're saying is that it's big.-Wafulz 02:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes. It's big. And I qualified why that is important for this article in that context. Do snarky pointers to miscellaneous guidelines invalidate my comments or was it intended to further discussion? SchmuckyTheCat

That a site is large and well-trafficked doesn't cut it. There are several computer games out there that have dedicated fan bases of many sizes. This doesn't make them notable. Show me a few non-trivial references to this site and I will completely change my position, but for now I can only say delete, no matter how well-trafficked. (By the way, please use four tildes to sign your comments so that we can see the date they were made) Gekedo 22:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - Alexa and a directory of fansites are not reliable sources. -Wooty [Woot?] [Spam! Spam! Wonderful spam!] 23:50, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep/Delete - There are a few reasons to keep this page open. One of them is that new members and new owners to Sim City 4 need a resource page to guide them. Sometimes, they go to wikipedia.org and search for "Sim City 4". At the bottom of the links page is a link for Simtropolis. That fansite contains some of the the most wonderful content and downloads imaginable with Sim City 4. Another reason to keep it is because one might not understand what Simtropolis is, so they might go to wikipedia.org and type in "Simtropolis" in the search field. This page is therefore, relevant to many people, as hundreds of thousands of people own the game. With opinions of keeping the page, there is a reason I have read on the Simtropolis site that because Simtropolis is a fansite, it may not need a wikipage. That's fine with me, as that goes. -User:John94538 — John94538 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Usefulness is not a criterion for keeping a page. -Wooty [Woot?] [Spam! Spam! Wonderful spam!] 00:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, non notable per WP:WEB. Dreadstar † 04:53, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep During this AFD, the article has been expanded with several sources and I believe that after this improvement, it now passes WP:WEB. Is he back? 11:32, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

• It doesn't pass WP:WEB. The only references to this site have been trivial, such as a directory on the EA site. Such references must be made from a non-notable search...I'm not being a policy lawyer here, but that policy is in place to assume that the myriad of fan sites out there can't get an article purely on the weight of a large fan base. Gekedo 22:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

• Neutral for now. Although I'm not a fan of creating fansite articles, this seems to be at least bit notable and article doesn't look bad now, though references can be surely improved. MarkBA ^t/c/@ 11:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete As I noted on the talk page, this article's "What links here" is a dismal list of redirects and talk/user pages. Let's take another fansite..."Civ 4 Fanatics". It has resources, including a mod which made it "official". Many members...etc. The fact is the web is full of fansites which have resources, and are "important" to the community that they pander to. The fact is that this is a fansite for a game that is 4 years old. I made what I thought was a good edit to this article...pruning most of the chaff and cutting it down. An edit was made by an IP saying they would "restore the article to their former glory". In short, I think this article is being kept alive by a hard core of community members from the website...it's a close-knit place. But reality dictates we can't have an article for every good fan-serving site. Gekedo 17:20, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

• It was interesting to note that before this AFD very few people were editing the article - it had changed little for over four months. Editing suddenly increased when a threat of an AFD appeared. Camaron1 | Chris 18:54, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the main problem I have is that it comes across as effectively free advertising for ST. Somebody seeing the link on the Simcity 4 article could be forgiven for thinking it is the only good Simcity 4 community. No other community is given this privilege where there is no non-trivial references to back up the article. Gekedo 22:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

• Keep per TheListUpdate, Willy888, and IsheBack's arguments. Either this article should be kept and rewritten or deleted, then rewritten as Camaron1 seems to have offered here and elsewhere to do. This site is very notable among the SimCity community, and even EA, Tilted Mill, and Monte Cristo (Cities Unlimited maker, unrelated to SC), seem to have acknowledged that fact by giving the site several interviews, exclusives, and mention. Put in better sources (I know they're out there somewhere!), and don't get rid of the article permanently. Poetic^X_contribs 04:02, 16 August 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.