Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TOG (hackerspace): Difference between revisions
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
m |
(comment) |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Ron Ritzman|Ron Ritzman]] ([[User talk:Ron Ritzman|talk]]) 00:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|{{SUBPAGENAME}}]] |
:<span style="color:#FF4F00;">'''[[WP:RELIST|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.'''</span><br /><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Ron Ritzman|Ron Ritzman]] ([[User talk:Ron Ritzman|talk]]) 00:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist -->[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|{{SUBPAGENAME}}]] |
||
* I'm not sure what 'relisted' means exactly. Is this article still proposed for deletion? If so, I believe I have addressed all the points in the original complaint. I have added a significant number of primary sources from different sources. There are now 29 references from more than 15 different sources. I believe this article is properly sourced. Are there any other problems with this article? If not, can we remove the AfD suggestion? [[User:Ebelular|Ebelular]] ([[User talk:Ebelular|talk]]) 17:07, 17 February 2011 (UTC) |
* I'm not sure what 'relisted' means exactly. Is this article still proposed for deletion? If so, I believe I have addressed all the points in the original complaint. I have added a significant number of primary sources from different sources. There are now 29 references from more than 15 different sources. I believe this article is properly sourced. Are there any other problems with this article? If not, can we remove the AfD suggestion? [[User:Ebelular|Ebelular]] ([[User talk:Ebelular|talk]]) 17:07, 17 February 2011 (UTC) |
||
| + | *:I researched all of the references, and per [[Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_9#Mailing_Lists_Question]], mailing lists aren't [[WP:RS|reliable sources]]. Neither are [[WP:SPS|forums, open wikis, blogs, newsletters, or personal websites]]. I don't believe blackletter.ie is a reliable source, and neither are "club" websites, such as the Irish Robotics Club. The Science Gallery does not appear to be a reliable source. Hackerspaces is an open wiki, so that does not qualify either. Artifactory is a hackerspace site, so it's not independent of the subject. Same with 091Labs. DigitalHub is a blog, so again not reliable. I am unsure about the [[Irish Times]], but being a newspaper I will [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] that it is reliable. Given what's left after my research (mostly self-references), there is not enough to establish the notability of this article. [[User:ArcAngel|<span style='color: #ffb612;background-color: #1e1e1e;'><b> ArcAngel </b>]] [[User talk:ArcAngel|(talk)]] </span>) 18:54, 17 February 2011 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 18:54, 17 February 2011
TOG (hackerspace)
- TOG (hackerspace) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: "TOG (hackerspace)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images)
This is another article with primary sourcing issues. Of the nine sources listed, seven are of the articles own website, one is a forum, and the first one is behind a paywall, so WP:V is an issue as well.
I could not find any significant third-party coverage of this space using a Google search and weeding out the usual, unreliable sources.
The article doesn't qualify for speedy deletion as it is a building. ArcAngel (talk) ) 08:53, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:18, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
---
I have updated the article to point to more sources. This should resolve the 'AfD' issue in favour of 'keep', yes? Ebelular (talk) 14:41, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what 'relisted' means exactly. Is this article still proposed for deletion? If so, I believe I have addressed all the points in the original complaint. I have added a significant number of primary sources from different sources. There are now 29 references from more than 15 different sources. I believe this article is properly sourced. Are there any other problems with this article? If not, can we remove the AfD suggestion? Ebelular (talk) 17:07, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- I researched all of the references, and per Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_9#Mailing_Lists_Question, mailing lists aren't reliable sources. Neither are forums, open wikis, blogs, newsletters, or personal websites. I don't believe blackletter.ie is a reliable source, and neither are "club" websites, such as the Irish Robotics Club. The Science Gallery does not appear to be a reliable source. Hackerspaces is an open wiki, so that does not qualify either. Artifactory is a hackerspace site, so it's not independent of the subject. Same with 091Labs. DigitalHub is a blog, so again not reliable. I am unsure about the Irish Times, but being a newspaper I will assume good faith that it is reliable. Given what's left after my research (mostly self-references), there is not enough to establish the notability of this article. ArcAngel (talk) ) 18:54, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
