This is an old revision of this page, as edited by HagermanBot (talk | contribs) at 12:41, 24 February 2007 (Paxed didn't sign: "→[]: "). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 12:41, 24 February 2007 by HagermanBot (talk | contribs) (Paxed didn't sign: "→[]: ")(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)| < February 23 | Deletion review archives: 2007 February | February 25 > |
|---|
24 February 2007
Neverball
- The game is pretty well known in open source circles, see for example http://happypenguin.org/show?Neverball which has almost 200 comments for Neverball;
- It's included in almost all linux distros; —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Paxed (talk • contribs) 12:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC).
- There is an active community for it at www.nevercorner.net;
- Several other open source games have just as "bad" articles on wikipedia, if Neverball article is deleted, then those should be deleted too (see http://en.wikipedia.org/Frozen_Bubble and http://en.wikipedia.org/GLTron for example, I can list more with a bit of searching, if needed...) --Paxed 12:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
YouThink.com
- YouThink.com (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore|AfD)
I-Am-Bored.com, a less significant site was not deleted. either I-Am-Bored should be deleted or both should be merged onto Youthink.com.Electricbassguy 04:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Endorse deletion. Inclusion is not an indicator of notability. Also, the other article mentioned should disappear in a short while or five days. MER-C 06:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Someone already removed Speedy and Prod on the other article. People seem to be defending it do to the no consensus. I think it's only fair if that is kept, Youthink and IAB should share one article, preferably YouThink.com. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Electricbassguy (talk • contribs) 09:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC).
- Endorse valid AfD. To show notability you have to have non-trivial 3rd party sources. None have been produced. I-Am-Bored currently has two links to 3rd party reviews. Note that being cool, interesting, useful, or even popular are not reasons for keeping an article on wikipedia if the subject is not encyclopedically notable. Eluchil404 10:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I-am-bored is actually Youthink, however. the whole site is a copy of the "Links" from Youthink.com. Also, I could find 3rd party reviews of YouThink as well. There are several online. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Electricbassguy (talk • contribs) 10:56, 24 February 2007 (UTC).
MY HUSBAND, THE PIG
|
|---|
| The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it. |
VERY USEFUL 128.187.0.178 02:23, 24 February 2007 (UTC) I use Misplaced Pages all the time to look at information about my favorite T.V. shows, and as I was looking at the next episode of Desperate Housewives, I noticed this comment in the VERY USEFUL Episode Guide Template: ‹The template Desperate Housewives episode has been proposed for deletion here.› I am not impressed, because I and my friends find it very useful. There should be no reason that it need be deleted. So, although the deletion has been proposed, I urge you not to ratify it. Thank-you. |
| The above is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it. |
Hamilton Stands
My article on the Hamilton Stands company was deleted under WP:A7 (non-notability) by Centrx, despite the fact that Bob Dylan and The Monkees notably used their products, as mentioned in the article, and a link to the company's Web page was included. I have spoken with Centrx, who insists that "reliable third-party sources, such as books and magazines, that cover the company as their main subject", be cited before he will restore the article. I find this ridiculous; by the same token, the Misplaced Pages articles on such companies as Ernie Ball and Dunlop Manufacturing should also have been deleted, since they do not cite such sources. Dylan biographies have included photos of Dylan with a Hamilton capo (if you've ever seen one, you can spot them a mile away) on his guitar, and Rhino Records liner notes to Monkees albums mention Hamilton Stands... as was noted in the article. I do not have the time to dig through media in an attempt to find an outside article or story about the company, and should not have to; the foregoing mentions ought to be quite enough to assert the company's notability. (A Web search for "Hamilton Stands" also turns up scads of listings of their products for sale.) Zephyrad 08:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Endorse simply being used by a notable professional or being sold over the internet does not confer notability. See also WP:INN it is quite likely that there are articles on wikipedia on companies even less notable than this one, but that doesn't mean they won't be held to the same high standards just that they haven't been yet. Eluchil404 10:20, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Will this work, as an article asserting notability? Bill Carpenter acquires Hamilton Stands This article states that Hamilton originated the folding music stand. I'd call that notable. Zephyrad 11:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)