Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sushicrowd

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. Deizio talk 21:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sushicrowd

A quick google search comes up with 561 hits and a quick scan reveals most of them are blogs from the creator and other non-verifiable sources. In the end, I don't think this is notable.-- Sasquatch t|c 22:57, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep Sushicrowd is a working open source media label and is notable compared to other registered labels on wiki. 70.95.119.36 23:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC) x.x.164.90
    • Comment: Recommendations of unregistered users are generally discounted in AFD. Stifle (talk) 15:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Article asserts lots of history, but no importance at all. And then there's this comment, posted on the talk page by the user who voted "keep" above, and who does not understand that nobody on WP "owns" articles: "This article is maintained by Sushicrowd media personnel. Any drastic changes to this article with false pretenses without the discretion of Sushicrowd.com is considered vandalism." Thus, the article is not just non-notable, but vanity. -- Kicking222 00:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Kicking222. Naconkantari 01:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Original article is historically inaccurate, and all attempts to correct these inaccuracies are changed by the original author. Non-verifiable, non-notable, and vain. lord 01:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: User's only edits are to this article, its talk page, and the AFD. Stifle (talk) 15:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Article in Sushicrowd is indeed historically accurate as it is compiled by Sushicrowd's staff and administrator. Sushicrowd is an established media label and contains current and project media worthy of notability. Some AfD nominations may be due to an attack on Sushicrowd. Sephihakubi
    • Comment: User's only edits are to this article, linked images, its talk page, and this AFD. Stifle (talk) 15:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Kicking222. 24.165.0.149 09:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: Recommendations of unregistered users are generally discounted in AFD. Stifle (talk) 15:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment It should be noted that both users who voted "Keep" on this article are in fact one and the same. lord 06:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: Since one was an IP edit, it's unlikely to be considered anyway. Stifle (talk) 15:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Lord, you ignorance and bickering is not tolerated here in Wikipedia. I am the other user who voted "Keep" for this article. Any turbulence that you have with the subject or a user here must be taken elsewhere from this discussion. Wonderdioswan 08:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Blatant self-promotion of non-existant "record labels" do not constitute valid Wikipedia entries and should be removed in the best interests of maintaining this encyclopedia. lord 10:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, at least unless properly referenced. Possible hoax. Stifle (talk) 15:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, Kicking222. Paddles 16:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Can the "Keep" voters point us to any major media coverage, or other Wikipedia:Reliable sources by which we can verify that Sushicrowd has actually done notable and widely noted things, rather than just being a project where some people have made agreements and made plans to do big things soon? Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and we can't report on gonna-be-notable record labels or gaming orgs or whatever. Barno 01:59, 22 May 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.