Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TES-forum

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. Sango123 (e) 02:53, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TES-forum

Notice originally added by User:82.31.27.110. Page for web forum, mostly consisting of a list of members. tregoweth 02:36, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, nn forum. Feezo (Talk) 02:45, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:WEB; Alexa ranking is 10,233 [1]--TBC^{??? ??? ???} 03:00, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:WEB and forumcruft. Royboycrashfan 03:09, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete forumcruft.ßlηguγεη | Have your say!!! 06:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I thought this was the official The Elder Scrolls forums! anyway, forumcruft ⇒ SWATJester

^Ready Aim _Fire! 06:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

• • Ha, so did I.--Isotope23 18:46, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Listing individual forum members should be a speedy deletion criterion. JIP | Talk 08:32, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Danny Lilithborne 11:33, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: As well as other things mentioned here, the article fails to provide a link to the forum. JIP | Talk 12:02, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Even with the weight of the Times newspaper behind this, this is still not notable. And a nice precedent to show all those other people who think their forum is notable. Average Earthman 12:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Keep. You need to read the forum pages and take a good look at the content before making such cursory statements such as many of those here appear to be. It is not valid to argue that because certain members have been named because of the usefulness or the otherwise outstanding nature of their contributions ( out of a total membership of some 100, 000 + teachers, university lecturers and educationalits in the UK) the article should be deleted. The forum offers much in the way of information and advice to those dealing with all matters educational.

These people may be using online names but that is irrelevent since most of the individuals posting here are also using similar online names to hide their identities. It is not possible to criticise others where you can be equally so criticised. The views and opinions of those on the forum are as valid and reliable as the views of those people voting here. Maybe more so.

The weight of the Times Educational Suppliment is good enough. This is a paper of considerable note. Many of the individuals on this forum appear to have high levels of qualification and expertise. Valuable expertise.

Much of the forum concentrates on dealing with professional and educational matters . It is a valid and reliable source of information and of advice on all matters educational, all matters dealing with the UK education system, and on many matters dealing with government policy and legislation.

It is an arena of discussion. Sometimes controversial. It is often the cutting edge of policy making debate in education. The TES forum is often used as a source of publication for TES articles. It is probably the largest and most honest collection of educational professionals concentrated into a single place. That has to be worthy of note.

Whilst in its current form the listing is probably inadiquate, I do not believe that the removal of this listing is justifiable under the deletion guidelines. Therefore keep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyndylou (talk • contribs)

• • Delete. It's worthy of note if those claims of size, validity and vast expertise are verifiable, which they have not been, and we still don't have a link to the actual forum. By the bye, this is my real name: RGTraynor 19:44, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:WEB Computerjoe's talk 16:04, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, doesn't meet WP:WEB.--Isotope23 16:30, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Doesn't meet my need to play Oblivion. Also non-notable. --Optichan 16:31, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete also per WP:WEB Gilraen of Dorthonion AKA Sophia^TalkTCF 11:15, 13 April 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.