Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WikiGadugi

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. JIP | Talk 07:46, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiGadugi

Article devoted to a non-notable website - a wikipedia fork of all things! -- Aim Here 09:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

• Weak delete, non-notable wikicity, 8 unique Google results [1] --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 09:39, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, non-notable fork. The entry WikiGadugi Website was deleted a few days ago as "plainly vanispamcruftisement". That characterization applies more strongly to this version. — MediaMangler 13:02, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, This site is a download of Wikipedia information some done by Merkey but edited in large part by Wikipedia members. Jeff did not like the edits so he started his own site that he could edit like HE wanted to. He is violating Wikipedia's copying policy. --Kebron 14:15, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

• Which part is he violating exactly? You are allowed to fork. kotepho 18:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

The part to credit the original source of Wikipedia not as himself. --Kebron 18:39, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, this is a mere renaming of the already deleted WikiGadugi Website article. The Google hits are either Wikipedia references, Merkey watchers discussing the site and it's admin (SCOX board), or postings or other websites of the admin of the site (LKML archives en merkeylaw.com). --MJ^(☎|@|C) 18:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I think you may have done a slight disservice to PeyoteMan (talk • contribs) by implying that he merely renamed the previous article. This version is better formatted and shares almost no content with the previous version. He may not have even seen the previous article. Of course, this version should still be deleted. — MediaMangler 18:56, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I never saw the other article, I just based it on the materials on the website. I found the site on Inktomi's subscription service. PeyoteMan 02:50, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I was referring to the subject; an article with a different name, but same subject, has already been deleted. For the same reasons this one should be deleted as well. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 17:54, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

• Weak delete I see no notability. kotepho 18:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Definitely non-notable. --Fuzzie (talk) 19:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - 383 hits in Yahoo, 8 on Google, 27 on MSN, 3500+ on Inktomi. Looks like it is getting some traffic. I guess Google is slow crawling the web or avoids Wikipedia mirrors. PeyoteMan 02:47, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

  383?? I get 19; all of them in the same categories mentiond on the Google hits. MSN gives me 4 results. And Inktomi is no longer an independent search engine, it was acquired by Yahoo in 2002, so how you got 3500+ hits with their engine is anybody's guess. --MJ^(☎|@|C) 18:03, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete unequivocably as WP:VSCA among other things. This part of an astroturfing campaign by the site maintainers, who have a stated purpose here. — Scm83x ^{hook 'em} 06:27, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per all of the above. --BWD ^(talk) 23:11, 1 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.