Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Digital Entertainment Network

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 was Delete. WaltonOne 19:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Digital Entertainment Network

The Digital Entertainment Network (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Not notable. Conflict of interest due to owner of "TDEN" is creator and editor of the article. Do not confuse with Digital Entertainment Network. For more information on "TDEN", see [1]. Cyborg Ninja (talk) 21:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep - this article was created as a result of concerns raised about copyright issues (which are discussed in this article) and were discussed at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 19#Digital Entertainment Network and The Digital Entertainment Network. That discussion covered conflict of interest and notability issues, with no definite conclusion on the latter point. Although notability is marginal, involvement with the more infamous Digital Entertainment Network is supported by a New York Post article of 2002 and the existence of the two articles ensures that the two firms relationship or actually lack thereof is recorded which seems a useful thing to do given the copyright issues which are supported by searches of the US Patent office's registers (and the NY Post article). This is marginal on notability but is a useful disambiguation point and does not breach WP:Spam. The company owner has sought to understand and abide by wikipedia guidleines and policies (after discussions) as opposed to the inference in the nomination above. I created the article and am the only editor - I am not connected with the company in any way and only came to the issue through the COI noticeboard. --Matilda talk 23:40, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Being sued by a now bankrupt company is no grounds for notability. The NYP article refers to them as the other DEN, not the DEN that blew through millions. -- lucasbfr talk 11:58, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as a non-notable company. Bearian (talk) 22:26, 17 December 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.