Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VGMix

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 no consensus. howcheng {chat} 18:19, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] VGMix

Site appears to fail WP:WEB, Alexa rank 323,000 [1], Wikipedia is top site linking in, does have inbound links [2] but lots of them appear to be blogs. I can't make up my mind about this one. JzG 10:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

• Comment we've got OCRemix, this is nearly as widespread and as popular as that. However, this doesn't have the sheer forum popularity (OCRemix has thousands and thousands of active forum members and a veritible seaload of posts) and certainly not the forum culture impact that OCRemix does - as techinically besides that even OCRemix probably doesn't meet WP:WEB, as it alexa is still below 10,000 at 50,000. BTW I say this as someone who goes there weekly and has probably listened to every song on that site... WhiteNight ^{T | @ | C} 15:37, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. -- Dragonfiend 18:49, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable website. Stifle 00:34, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, relevant to the video-game arrangement community, closely tied with other website The Shizz, whose article's existance is not disputed. Starghost 02:06, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
• page linked from this forum - vfdsock added WhiteNight ^{T | @ | C} 06:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep after much thinking. This may not meet WP:WEB techinically - but there are other aspects of the site that are far more notable than sheer numbers, especially the split-off from OCRemix and its success thereof. WhiteNight ^{T | @ | C} 07:25, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm withdrawing because I may be biased on this subject. I'd encourage the closing admin to take a hard look at the afd though WhiteNight ^{T | @ | C} 07:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep for strong connection to The Shizz website and considerable difference in policy and quality control from OCRemix ScrewedThePooch 17:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep for overall importance in video game remix community, as well as the vital purpose it serves as a way to improve and receive criticism for music works. If it is removed, OCRemix should not be on here either. Alexa is a poor judge of a website's relevance. Zpatterson 18:55, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep It has a completely different purpose than OCRemix, so it shouldn't be compared as if they were the same. VGMix is extremely important in helping musicians get their work out in the open, and letting people give criticism so that the musician may become better. nickthenewbie
• Comment As of right now (Jan 19), there are just shy of 11,000 registered users. I'm not sure how many are required before a site is 'notable,' but there it is. It's a niche audience, to be sure, but it's a palpable one.
• Keep. Not only does this site help less-established remixers get critiques on their work, it was founded as the result of a content dispute over at OCR, from some prominent mixers there. (Note: Not a precisely accurate description, but it can be argued that without OCR, which already has an article, this page would never have existed. Mo0[talk] 23:24, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and Expand. Just pointing out firstly that I was not directed here by anyone. In as much as one would consider the video game music fan arrangement scene notable enough to be counted here (I would argue it is given the fanbase it has), VGMix doesn't seem to fail notability as it's the second most frequented music site in that scene behind OverClocked ReMix. Many musicians at OverClocked ReMix frequent both sites, and downloads for the most popular music there goes into the thousands, possibly beyond the 10,000s. The article is in viable stub condition and should be expanded in order to further establish its notability. - Liontamer 07:39, 19 January 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.