User talk:Ned Scott/Wikinfo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] More useful in mainspace
Why isn't this in the mainspace? It looks fine. --Skylights76 (talk) 16:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me, too. It was AFD'd as non-notable, since they couldn't find any substantial sources from anywhere besides Wikinfo itself. Ned's improved it a lot since then, though, so I'll move it back to mainspace.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- It's almost identical to the deleted version - look at the changes that have been made (removal of one reference, two templates and a few categories). I've put it back in userspace, as I could have speedy deleted it under G4. This ought to go through WP:DRV before it goes back into mainspace. Hut 8.5 18:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
-
- I echo the concerns raised by Hut 8.5 and had left a message for the administrator responsible for the most recent closure of the deletion discussion. Please utilize community deletion review before moving this back into the mainspace. coccyx bloccyx(toccyx) 18:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- DRV is very likely to find the closing correct - if you want to put it back in the mainspace, you really need to address the result of the AfD - it's failure of WP:N. Find reliable, third party sources that discuss Wikinfo to some kind of depth - as it stands, if you remove the information that's sourced directly from Wikinfo itself, there's barely two sentences left. For internet encyclopaedia projects, compare Veropedia and Conservapedia which are both the subject of dedicated coverage in reasonable-ish sources (The Toronto Star, Wired, The San Francisco Chronicle New Scientist and so forth). Of course, you can take a shot at DRV anyways, but it's very unlikely to be successful. Find the information needed first, then write an article. WilyD 18:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
