Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SnitchSeeker

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 delete. Johnleemk | Talk 11:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SnitchSeeker

I just completely overhauled this article, but I think it was a wasted effort. There is no where I can find that asserts its notability. Alexa ranking of about 200,000, but there's no sources out there to help it meet WP:WEB. The Google result is 200,000, but only EIGHT pages of results. About 80 unique pages and then the only 199,920 are part of the SnitchSeeker website that comes up in the results. Metros232 22:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


  • SnitchSeeker.com is a Harry Potter fan website and has been around since 2002. I noticed you have other Harry Potter websites listed on wikipedia, as well (one of which has only been around for a month). We boast over 10,000 original hits to our site every day and have a membership nearly 20,000 strong. In addition to being one of the top sites for Harry Potter news (along with Mugglenet, HPANA, and The Leaky Cauldron, which also have articles on wikipedia), we have hosted a number of contests which were sponsored by Warner Brothers. Is the article being deleted because it is a forum-based website? Is there a google criteria for websites being posted to wikipedia? Is there a minimum ranking we have to achieve? Kris, aka Biochemkris, Site Manager at SnitchSeeker.com—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.130.1.235 (talk • contribs)


Oh, I see. Well, our site ownder was interviewed for an article on Norwegian-based HP sites here: http://www.rb.no/lokal_kultur/article1681962.ece (unfortunately, the article is in Norwegian but a translation is here: http://www.snitchseeker.com/vb3/showthread.php?t=26835&highlight=community). We also won Best Community, Most Interactive, Best Linkage, and Most Fan Oriented Seeker Awards last year: http://www.thequidditchpitch.net/seeker/winners.shtml I guess if that's not enough, we can get deleted but, you should check the rest of the HP sites you have on here for the same issue (only Mugglenet, TLC, and HPANA have been recognized by JK Rowling or any other sites, as far as I'm aware).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.130.1.235 (talk • contribs)

Additionally, we beat all the above listed sites, including JKR, when we won those 4 awards listed above. We also have regular correspondence with a WB representative in regards to news, rumours, contests and images.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.6.115.183 (talk • contribs)

  • Delete There's nothing really notable about it, apart from awards it got from another Harry Potter site. By contrast, Mugglenet has a big enough presence to have had staff interview Rowling face to face, among other things, so there's a pretty big distinction. Dead 01:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Right, which is why I don't dispute Mugglenet, TLC, or HPANA having listing on here. It's the smaller sites, like one that has only been around since last month that have entries, that I take issue with if they are allowed where we are not.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.130.1.235 (talk • contribs)

  • Comment. If you have noticed any Wikipedia articles on small websites that are only a month or two old, please let us know. Please be assured nobody is singling you out, and if sites like that are still here, it's because they haven't been noticed yet. Fan1967 01:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

The one that stood out to me was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Illusions (Magical Illusions). They state in their article that they opened in May 2006. I want to apologize to Metros232 for all the work they put into our article which isn't getting published. I assure you that the members who put it together and posted it here on Wikipedia didn't realize that being notable by the fandom and Warner Brothers wasn't enough to earn a spot here. I'd like to thank all of you for your time and maybe once we live up to your expectations, we'll try posting again (I just felt bad for the people who put all the time and effort into this, both on our members' end and your end and thought I should come over here and see what I could do). Thanks again.

Oh, one more thing, would a statement from our Warner Brother's contact do any good? I know we haven't spoken one-on-one with JK or gotten any big awards from non-HP sites but, we are a large enough presence to warrant the attention of the people over at WB. We also had Matthew Lewis, who plays Neville Longbottom in the films, answer questions from SSers (albeit not in person): http://www.snitchseeker.com/vb3/showthread.php?t=29007 I don't want to seem like I'm fishing here but, I never expected this article to be deleted and, like I stated above, I'd hate to see everyone's hard work go to waste if we are worthy and it's merely my lack of proper communication that's preventing it. 69.130.1.235Kris

  • Realistically, I doubt it would help. People from the movies engage in all sorts of PR in very minor ways, like appearing at a shopping mall. Doesn't make the mall notable. Sorry, I understand you've put a lot of work into this, but I just don't think, at this time, your site makes the grade. Good luck on expanding your influence and popularity, and you may be back. Fan1967 03:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete fails WP:WEB.--Peta 04:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm back to annoy you once more. Does being mentioned in a Wikipedia article on the Harry Potter fandom earn us a spot? Or is being linked from Wikipedia not considered notable enough to earn us a spot on Wikipedia? I suppose not if it's just a link, huh? Harry Potter fandom - 69.130.1.235Kris

  • Sorry, but the "we should be in Wikipedia because somebody put us in Wikipedia" argument is a little too circular. Being mentioned in a list of fan sites is reasonable, but doesn't mean qualifying for a separate article. Fan1967 13:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for wasting everyone's time. If we had realized how insiginificant we were, even with what recognition we have received, we wouldn't have bothered submitting in the first place. Thanks a bunch.


  • Comment Perhaps this is notable - Snitchseeker.com teamed up with My2centences in 2003 to beta test the company's new 'Fanlib' technology with the Potter Project. Media articles and information on Snitchseeker's involvement can be found at the Fanlib website. And here are two press releases which may be of intrest: 1 and 2 --Kroevyn 16:55, 2 June 2006 (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.