Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Wicked WiZardZ

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Wicked WiZardZ

Band vanity of the rather, uh, absurd kind. Article pretty much states that they are not notable -- Ferkelparade π 13:12, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete: Very funny band vanity. Geogre 15:15, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete Benji 15:31, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - bad vanity. Spangineer 15:54, Dec 14, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. No sign of notability. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:12, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete, no evidence of notability (and the writing's a mess, with cute bits). Wyss 22:44, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • To be deleted in the known future. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 23:44, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • OMFG it's another one for BJAODN!!11!!. ROFLMAO. Alphax (talk) 05:04, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

Comments from Maker of Article about Wicked WiZardZ: I don't see the big deal about this, but I strongly oppose the idea of deleting the page about about Wicked WiZardZ. Why? Because I don't see it as abusing nor rude/offensive in any way - And what you people mean - 'Bad vanity' (that they are boasting of their artistic skills?) or 'Not notable' - If you think the band is too weird or too unorthodox to be here, or just not 'famous enough' to be mentioned, I suggest you re-think. In an enclycopedia, especially an free one, everything should be worth an mention. This article was NOT ment as an advertision. To your note the article have been cleaned up for 'cute bits' and 'mess'. Thank you.

  • Sorry, my friend, but "free" does not equal "open season on Wikipedia's servers."  :^) I know you mean well, but what you're attempting to do with this article is against this site's guidelines. The policy is simple: No "vanity" articles. We all hope that Wicked WiZardZ is a success. When it is, rest assured someone will write about it. Gently delete with best wishes. - Lucky 6.9 01:08, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Our main concern here isn't the "cute bits" or the "mess", since those sorts of things can always be fixed, but the topic. The de facto policy is that we cover things that have significant and notable implications for society at large, and it seems Wicked WiZardZ hasn't yet reached that point. [[User:Livajo|Ливай | ☺]] 08:33, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. No article with phrases like "an abstract/horrorcore rap band with sample-shift electronica equipment" should be allowed to survive! P Ingerson 12:19, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Comments from Maker of Article about Wicked WiZardZ: Althought I strongly oppose the decision the Wikipedians who is loosely based on it's "vanity", and "phrases" and "not being significant enough", I will bow before the decision although I don't find it fair. Cute bits and Mess have been changed, although, to YOUR best wishes. But, alas, what is an gentle deletion in the face of defeat? We have been confirmed of our uselessness to you. We will come back when we are more...famous for you. Until then....we will survive as an recognized band despite the odds, I hope....ur until the guidelines are less strict. Good bye.

    • On the contrary, it would be unfair for us to keep this when we routinely reject articles on other bands who have not yet released albums achieved notability in the public eye. The fact of the matter is that we can't maintain thousands of articles on bands and people that haven't reached any fame, since it would be exceedingly difficult to verify any information about them (or even that they exist at all), and because they would not be very useful, probably ending up as articles that no other articles link to and that nobody would search for. We have to draw the line somewhere between what is useful for an encyclopedia for the whole world and what is only going to fulfill the curiosity of a negligible group of people. We are not accusing you of "usefulness", just saying that your band is not yet at a level where it would merit inclusion in an encyclopedia. I urge you to reconsider leaving the Wikipedia over this. We always warmly welcome new contributors. [[User:Livajo|Ливай | ☺]] 05:07, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. This belongs to somewhere else, not in encyclopedia. Someone should set up a band wiki for these types of articles, so we could have an outlet where to transwiki. jni 07:11, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)