Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Tango.info (2nd nomination)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A note on one of the arguments that wasn't addressed: Mikka asked people to 'check the backlinks' - the only articlespace backlinks are a list and a stub on another website which may also be vulnerable to AfD.
I say that as an editor and not as the closing admin, which is why I added this to the talk page and not to my closing comments. I hope people won't feel that I'm blurring the lines between my judgement on the result of the discussion and my own opinions, but I felt Mikka's argument deserved a response. --Sam Blanning(talk) 19:31, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Not that it mattered
Not that it would have made a difference but I tried to vote when you were shutting it down. See following:
- Conditionally (see following) I vote Keep.
1.) Regarding WP:WEB: Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is not clear that, according to its 1st criteria, this page has NOT been been "the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself." Do we consider, other Tango websites to be non-trivial published works? Or are they non-trivial *enough*? Because a link shown on the article's page seems to reference mention by at least one other Tango website. It does appear to fail the other two criteria for WP:WEB, but I'm not clear on the 1st one.
2.) Regarding WP:SPAM, I am not completely clear on this either. #2 among Tango websites would seem to establish at least a degree of notability. If it were the #2 Alexa-ranked US government site, would we be considering it for deletion? But I guess the issue for most is not relative rank, but overall rank. I think we should reconsider whether overall rank is relevant in this case. If overall rank were the litmus test for inclusion on Wikipedia, nothing that wasn't popular enough would ever warrant an article. The author of the website and the WP article appear to be the same person, but the content itself is relatively objective; it's not presented in a "buy my website" kind of way. To the degree that it does, it would be *really* easy to fix it without deleting the whole thing.
3.) Don't know who "that big fat bald orange bloke" is. ;)
What precedent is there for useful articles about notable websites pertaining to a given subject matter? Does anyone have statistics on this? I'm not sure that the article says anything that couldn't be covered in a summary blurp listed with a link to the page under the "External Links" section of the Tango and Argentine Tango pages. In lieu of information regarding precedent or statistical info on this, my vote is conditional. If anyone can answer my questions satisfactorily, my vote would be different. --Antelope In Search Of Truth 20:09, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
