Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shetlink: Difference between revisions
Iridescent (talk | contribs) |
Prroudfoot (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
*'''Weak delete''' I removed the discussion forums section; as the nominator noted that was not appropriate. I also agree with Dr bab that the [[WP:N|notability]] derives mostly from the [[Sakchai Makao]] case, so this should probably be merged into that article. [[User:Gwernol|Gwernol]] 12:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
*'''Weak delete''' I removed the discussion forums section; as the nominator noted that was not appropriate. I also agree with Dr bab that the [[WP:N|notability]] derives mostly from the [[Sakchai Makao]] case, so this should probably be merged into that article. [[User:Gwernol|Gwernol]] 12:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete without prejudice''' article as it stands doesn't say anything that couldn't be said better on [[Sakchai Makao]]; the article can be recreated if the website does something important in its own right.<font face="Trebuchet MS"> - [[User:Iridescenti|<font color="orangered">'''irides'''</font><font color="darkviolet">'''centi'''</font>]] [[User_talk:Iridescenti|<small><font color="chocolate"><i>(talk to me!)</i></font></small>]]</font> 16:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
*'''Delete without prejudice''' article as it stands doesn't say anything that couldn't be said better on [[Sakchai Makao]]; the article can be recreated if the website does something important in its own right.<font face="Trebuchet MS"> - [[User:Iridescenti|<font color="orangered">'''irides'''</font><font color="darkviolet">'''centi'''</font>]] [[User_talk:Iridescenti|<small><font color="chocolate"><i>(talk to me!)</i></font></small>]]</font> 16:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
||
I am the original author of the article. In retrospect I do agree that the article had too many links back to the website (I didn't set out to 'abuse' the wiki), but many of the links which have been deleted were to important and relevant discussions and information regarding Shetland which is hosted on the website (such as the current wind farm debate and the Bressay Bridge construction proposal etc). The relevant content has been deleted from the article by others, leaving only the Sakchai Makao references. While the website may be small in comparison to many other community websites, it is catering for a niche i.e. people of Shetland. The website is popular among Shetland people/ ex-pats and as such, I don’t think it warrants deletion. Over to you! |
|||
Revision as of 15:48, 13 April 2007
This article is advertizing for a small and relatively unknown community website. The short article contains 23 links back to their own website, and little information. In my opinion it is also categorized incorrectly.
- Delete All references of any relevance seem to revolve around the Sakchai Makao case. If this is the only case that has brought Shetlink to the limelight,a small mention of Shetlinks role in the case on the Sakchai Makao article might be appropriate. It does not warrant an article of its own.Dr bab 07:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Weak delete I removed the discussion forums section; as the nominator noted that was not appropriate. I also agree with Dr bab that the notability derives mostly from the Sakchai Makao case, so this should probably be merged into that article. Gwernol 12:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete without prejudice article as it stands doesn't say anything that couldn't be said better on Sakchai Makao; the article can be recreated if the website does something important in its own right. - iridescenti (talk to me!) 16:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
I am the original author of the article. In retrospect I do agree that the article had too many links back to the website (I didn't set out to 'abuse' the wiki), but many of the links which have been deleted were to important and relevant discussions and information regarding Shetland which is hosted on the website (such as the current wind farm debate and the Bressay Bridge construction proposal etc). The relevant content has been deleted from the article by others, leaving only the Sakchai Makao references. While the website may be small in comparison to many other community websites, it is catering for a niche i.e. people of Shetland. The website is popular among Shetland people/ ex-pats and as such, I don’t think it warrants deletion. Over to you!