Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zoozle

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 of the debate was delete --Ezeu 20:30, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zoozle

Non-notable website (not included in the relevant Google search [1]), uncited claims to fame. Has been linkspammed before [2]. Haakon 19:25, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Comment Why do you want to delete it? It provides usefull information about zoozle and its technics and has only one extern link! Please provide a statement! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thecerial (talk • contribs)
    • I gave a statement above. Beyond that, "providing information" is not a sufficient criterion for an article to be included in an encyclopedia. Haakon 19:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
  • do not delete An Article about the first Bittorrent search engine should be linkspamming??? I do not think so. (by the way, the german version is high ranked at google: 3) Data5000
    • Comment: Data5000 is one of the administrators of Zoozle, and the author of the article. Haakon 11:23, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete linkspam; Zoozle fails WP:WEB. B.Wind 20:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment zoozle is included in one of the most used torrentclients named Bitcomet. So zoozle definitly NOT fails WP:WEB Data5000
  • Delete as per nom. --P199 21:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Do not delete if its possible to provide some neutral references about the claim that this is the first bittorrent search engine ("zoozle was the first BitTorrent Search engine.") Nsaa 11:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
    • comment see Wayback Maschine 4 (currently down :-( ) there is a version cached of April 2004 (bittoogle released March 2004) Data5000
      • comment update the article with this reference (maybe as a screendump)? Nsaa 12:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
        • comment sorry i do do not have, i hope it will be online soon Data5000 15:04, 30 May 2006 (MET)
    • Even if it was "the first BitTorrent search engine", this does not make it notable in my opinion. "BitTorrent search engine" is not a significant website category. It is just a BitTorrent index that happens to also have a search function. BitTorrent indexes were plentiful before Zoozle. Furthermore, just demonstrating that Zoozle did exist in February 2004 does not prove that no other similar site existed before. At the end of the day, this article does not adhere to WP:WEB. Haakon 19:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
      • Update: It seems that Isohunt launched BitTorrent spidering/searching/indexing in June 2003 [4], a full eight months before Zoozle opened in German. Haakon 09:41, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
      • comment I did not agree, i see a major interest in this article. Let me summarize it:
        • 30000 visitors a day (and counting)
        • included in BitComet (first site in german version and many other languages)
        • Google Pagerank 5
        • seems to be the first BitTorrent Search engine
        • votes: delete:3 | do not delete:3 Data5000 22:15, 30 May 2006 (MET)
      • comment at the following weekend i will prepare a comparision of different bittorrent search engine and when the where registered. i will inform you with a link here.~~~~. --Thecerial
  • Keep, I like the technical descriptions, and wp isn't paper. --Snarius 17:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Scratch that. perform a zoozle search and it'll ask you to come to this page and vote. Downgrading to neutral --Snarius 18:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
      • To see how they operate, look at [5]. Quotes: "Do you like zoozle? Then add us in Wikipedia. May they stop deleting us :)" "If you see more content related articles, may add us ;)" This is their "help us" page, largely dedicated to encouraging fans to linkspam Wikipedia. To see the effect of this, notice that several of the keep votes here are by low-editcount users. Also note this previous AfD. Haakon 23:36, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
        • that is only a hint for users who like zoozle and users which are interested in Wikipedia. What should be false with content related? The previous AfD based on a poor Article. Data5000 17:48, 1 June 2006 (MET)
          • There should be a consensus among wikipedia users, not zoozle users. BTW sign your comments with ~~~~. --Snarius 17:29, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

.

Ok. Here is my suggestion: i will take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WEB and i will modify zoozle to fit the standarts. i will remove the "please at us to the wikipedia" on the helpus.htm site and few things more. lets work together to find a solution that is "win-win" for everyone of us. please give us a chance. we can add a link back from zoozle to a special wikipedia category that needs to be focused working at. as said before we have 30 000 unique visitors on zoozle everyday. with a link back to wikipedia with the comment to "activly take part in the wikipedia community by providing help & articles" it should be possible for zoozle to contribute back to the wiki family. so everyone is helped!

let me summarize what Torsten and I will do on the weekend: - at the upcoming weekend i will modify zoozle to fullfill http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WEB needs - i will remove the "add us to wiki" from the help pages ( en + ge ) - we will add a link to wiki + usefull comment to http://www.zoozle.net/zoozle.php - the page that a search query goes to and that has about 950 000 visits so far in may 06

I would please you in return to give us a change! a change to change zoozle - a change for zoozle in the wikipedia community?

Yours, Sebastian ~~~~. --Thecerial

  • You cannot simply "modify" Zoozle to become notable, which is what WP:WEB is about. Wikipedia articles live or die on their own merits, not on some "agreement" or covenant between Wikipedia and webmasters. Haakon 22:44, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
    • There are votes against deletion and for deletion and i see no "winner". Thecerial descriped a good solution. @Haakon: I will never understand people like you ;) Information should be free! Data5000 12:58 2 June 2006 (MET)
      • That's because Haakon is committed to building an encyclopedia while you seem to be trying to use wikipedia to get traffic to your site. This sort of thing is a common problem here. See also WP:VANITY Snarius 13:30, 2 June 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.