Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ten Ton Hammer

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. Admin rationale on Afd talk page. A Train ^{take the} 17:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ten Ton Hammer

Ten Ton Hammer (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Deleted once as A7 and G11, now re-created with assertions of notability in the form of passing mentions in some external media. No evidence presented of substantive coverage in reliable independent sources, Google shows only around a hundred hits for the exact text. Article reads as WP:OR, site forum includes the usual garbage (http://forums.tentonhammer.com/showthread.php?p=32565). Apparently they are watching me; I wouldn't want to disappoint them. Guy (Help!) 16:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - I'm a third party proponent. I use Ten Ton Hammer as a source for many of the MMO's that I participate in. It is accurate and reliable. Yes, it has forums, but many places that are listed here have forums as well as content. TTH articles themselves are not OR, but well documented with references to other articles. I find I link to many other sites listed in their articles during the course of my time spent on TTH. I am not a paid employee. I am volunteering my time to see that a valuable resource be included in the Wikipedia. It would be a shame to not include this type of resource in this encyclopedia. It's larger and more helpful than the other two sites mentioned below. --Zannniee 17:25, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - Indeed we are JzG. *smiles* Anyway, you should not redelete the page, as there are sites of comparable size and stature (Stratics and Warcry) that have pages on the Wiki and are not being threatened with deletion. We are still looking for clarification on several issues brought up in the "discussion" section of the page that have not been addressed. I'll reask here: would being considered an "affiliated" website (a status symbol) be the equivalent of a notable award. There are several gaming companies that consider Ten Ton Hammer "affiliated". We are collecting quotes from their community managers as we speak. Micajah (talk) 18:24, 25 January 2007 (UTC).
  • Cleanup & Neutral for now WarCry is AfD too right now, but I've been working to find and add proper references for it to show its notability per WP:WEB. If someone could do the same thing with TTH, I think that'd go a long way towards establishing notability. And clean up the article to be a bit more neutral too, right now, it reads like an ad/press release. :) Shrumster 12:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Weak Keep. Cleaned up some stuff, added a reference or two, but it does need more references. And serious rewriting of some of the parts. I've already started NPOV-ing the thing, need some help rephrasing some stuff to make them not sound like a promotional thingy. To the TTH people here, if you guys are serious about the entry, please look for some 3rd-party references and add them to the article. Shrumster 17:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment. Site's verifiable and notable enough for me now. While there's a lot of WP:COI going on here, I think the article is moving towards NPOV now. Cleaned up the links and references, could use some more.Shrumster 20:48, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - Hello, Nicole Hamlett here, I work for the aforementioned insubstantiated network. It appears that our Affiliation with Sigil Games is not a valid indication that we are a credible source for MMO news etc. If I may, could I please have a direct list of things that we need to do as a company to validate our existence within these pages? Thank you. -- unsigned comment left on 18:38, 25 January 2007 by 75.70.215.55 (Talk)

Hi Nicole, I did initiate an AfD for WarCry (website) actually, but since then some reasonable references have been found for it. As I mention below, the guideline for notability is at WP:WEB, thanks. Marasmusine 18:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Danny Gourley here. I also work for Ten Ton Hammer. I find it interesting that so much effort is being made to keep this entry from existing. I mean, I can use Wikipedia to find an exact recipe for how to make crack cocaine, but the information on TTH is deemed to have too little value to be here? Just tell us what hoops we have to jump through to impress you guys as much as Bees_wax and Chewing_gum and we'll get it to you.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.70.215.55 (talk) 18:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

Hallo Danny, the information I've been working from is at WP:WEB, thanks. Marasmusine 18:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. Marasmusine 18:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I've read this page and the article talk page. I'm sorry, but I do not think the site meets WP:WEB. I further think it always bad form when the site owners rather than third parties are the proponents of the keep argument. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm third party. I just enjoy their site and the information available. I'm the individual who originally constructed the page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Micajah (talk) 21:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

• Delete - article needs evidence of coverage from reliable sources other than the creator's own website. Walton monarchist89 19:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as having no independent references The only reference provided in the article is the Ten Ton website. The article needs to provide independent, external published references talking about Ten Ton. If good references can be provided, then I'll reconsider the possibility of keeping. Dugwiki 20:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete or Speedy No evedence of meeting WP:WEB or even coming close. Based on the forum thread they seem to see having a WP article as an advertisement or trophy. How wrong they are. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete the references are extremely minimal and insufficient to establish notability; plus a clear conflict of interest. — brighterorange (talk) 05:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete: Fails WP:WEB; it's just another game site that lacks reliable sources to back up it's notability. Based on the comments in this debate, there are two things I should mention: Firstly, please read WP:ILIKEIT. Just because you like it and find it useful does not mean it should have its own article on Wikipedia. I like the picture frame on my wall, but that doesn't mean I should make an article about it. Secondly, looking at the comments by some of the TTH staff, it seems there is a conflict of interest. Be aware that Wikipedia records what is verifiable; it does not record everything in existence. Please do not use Wikipedia is a media for promoting your site. --Scottie theNerd 05:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Well, it's steadily improving at least. Still needs more work and more sources. --Scottie theNerd 02:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: Participants please note that failing WP:WEB (or any notability guideline) is not a criterion for speedy deletion. Only articles with no (verifiable) assertion of notability may be speedied. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 13:06, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. As mentioned earlier, TTH staff participants should be aware of the guidelines in Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. This doesn't mean that TTH staff input is not valued, just that it can't be treated as an unbiased source. Nor does it mean that TTH is in any way a poorly run site, just that its encyclopedic value (see WP:WEB) has not been verified by a reliable third-party source. --Alan Au 17:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. I'm in no way affiliated with anyone to do with gaming, except I bought a Wii for my niece. It does seem that TTH is being regularly covered or republished by IGN "Ten Ton Hammer" site:ign.com (e.g. [1]), which could assist them cross the WP:WEB line by way of criteria 3. If this was to be kept, it would need to grow a lot of reliable sources rather quickly. If the TTH staff wanted to do this, I suggest they find the best five sources from the most notable sources (i.e. no forums, and try to find sources where the author has a real persons name), and include them on the talk page. If they are not publicly accessible, please provide explicit details on how the article can be found (title, date, author, etc), as we have people here who have access to LexisNexis, but you need to do the grunt work so they can verify the article in a few minutes. John Vandenberg 14:08, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. Ok, cleaned up the article's other sections, reworded POV stuff into NPOV with references. Shrumster 16:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per obvious notability. This page is a known underground hangout for 3rd party MMO guys. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 01:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. BTW, just realized that perhaps the article should be moved to Ten Ton Hammer (website) since it seems more appropriate? Shrumster 09:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• No, that isnt appropriate; see WP:NAME. Note that the name of the article isnt being discussed here, it is the content; see WP:Afd and WP:DEL. John Vandenberg 12:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, when I went to look at the page I wasn't expecting that to be my argument, but it appears relatively NPOV. Several sources are cited, some of them are not very substantial mentions, but it appears some of them are. Forum garbage aside, it appears this one's notable. Seraphimblade 01:42, 31 January 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.