Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Titanic: The Ride

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. WjBscribe 01:55, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Titanic: The Ride

Titanic: The Ride (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Someone's "ride" from a home roller-coaster simulator. Not even CLOSE to notable. PROD tag added, but removed without comment by creator, who has the identical content on his user page. Calton | Talk 14:01, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

• Comment by page author: This is in no way an advertisement. It was created because it is a revolutionary step in online game play and has become the most popular ride with the computer program. It has been viewed over 120,000 times. Please don't delete this thread, I think it is worth saving. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pottertheories (talk • contribs) 14:03, August 30, 2007 (UTC) — Pottertheories (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
• Delete Hard to imagine any notability here. Someone did something. Nice effort, not notable. MarkBul 14:30, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
• Strong delete per MarkBul and nom. /Blaxthos 14:35, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:MADEUP. I don't think this is really anywhere close to passing WP:WEB. --Bfigura ^(talk) 18:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Wikipedia is not for things made up at school, home, etc. No reliable sources to indicate notability. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:01, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable, made up one day. Nice graphics, but anyone with a bit of knowhow can produce those. -- Roleplayer 20:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
• No Delete: I think this is legitimite and it seems like it took a lot of work to do this project. I don't know, maybe give it a chance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stonecreek777 (talk • contribs) 14:33, August 31, 2007 - — Stonecreek777 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • I know WP:EFFORT refers to the articles themselves, but it kind of applies here. "Someone worked hard on it" is not a reason to keep. People work hard on lots of things, that doesn't make them notable. Smashville 16:45, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
• I'm leaning away from deletion; this is popular. I think it should stay. At the same time, it doesn't seem like something that is big enough to have it's own article. Perhaps it should merely have a mention in the Titanic (1997 film) article, seeing as it is based upon the film. EDIT: also, I keep seeing people quoting the WP:MADEUP rule, which is odd, because it states clearly in the article that it took eleven months to produce. -FiNiX —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.125.235.105 (talk) 03:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC) — 209.125.235.105 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Comment WP:ILIKEIT really isn't a great reason to keep something. And just because it took WP:EFFORT doesn't make it notable. Please see Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, and WP:WEB for what would make this notable. --Bfigura ^(talk) 04:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
• 'Keep i think we should keep the page, its really interesting! --Yankeesrj12 16:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

• WP:INTERESTING is not a reason to keep an article. There are two WalMarts two miles apart on the same street where I live...that's interesting, but it doesn't warrant a WP article. Smashville 17:16, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Wikipedia is not a place for made up non-notable rollercoaster rides. Smashville 17:18, 2 September 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.