Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/TheGreatHatsby: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Rivalarrival (talk | contribs) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
*'''Keep'''. It's very useful to know why your computer is randomly making friends in the middle of the night, and the $optout command actually prevented an e-fight for me this morning. --[[User:Achellios|Achellios]] ([[User talk:Achellios|talk]]) 18:45, 23 November 2008 (UTC) |
*'''Keep'''. It's very useful to know why your computer is randomly making friends in the middle of the night, and the $optout command actually prevented an e-fight for me this morning. --[[User:Achellios|Achellios]] ([[User talk:Achellios|talk]]) 18:45, 23 November 2008 (UTC) |
||
*'''keep'''. All current sources may be blogs, however, several of those (8, 13, 14) are "official" sources - blog entries by someone directly associated with the project. As far as notability, the bots can affect anyone who uses AIM and any of a number of prominent online communities. A livejournal community was created specifically to discuss these bots.[[User:Rivalarrival|Rival]] ([[User talk:Rivalarrival|talk]]) 20:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC) |
*'''keep'''. All current sources may be blogs, however, several of those (8, 13, 14) are "official" sources - blog entries by someone directly associated with the project. As far as notability, the bots can affect anyone who uses AIM and any of a number of prominent online communities. A livejournal community was created specifically to discuss these bots.[[User:Rivalarrival|Rival]] ([[User talk:Rivalarrival|talk]]) 20:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC) |
||
** The LiveJournal community is a great point. Surely a community with about 1300 members proves something about notability? [[User:Eurleif|Eurleif]] ([[User talk:Eurleif|talk]]) 21:29, 23 November 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 21:29, 23 November 2008
- TheGreatHatsby (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
No indication that this passes WP:N or any of the other notability guidelines. All references are blogs, which are not considered reliable sources. SchuminWeb (Talk) 20:42, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
- Agree with nom. Delete as not passing WP:N. X MarX the Spot (talk) 20:45, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. This is a very interesting phenomenon, in my opinion. If you look at the article's talk page, you can see numerous comments from people who didn't want the article deleted the first time there was a possibility of it being deleted. For other sources, here's a post on the official blog of Synthesis (Magazine) (this is obviously still a blog, but I think it's more compliant with WP:SPS): [1]. And here's a post on MetaFilter (which is a high-profile community blog, and is less self-published than a normal blog, I believe): [2]. Eurleif (talk) 08:32, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- keep. Among other things, it's a sufficiently notable nuisance for an opt-out to have been published. --Philcha (talk) 14:18, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. It's very useful to know why your computer is randomly making friends in the middle of the night, and the $optout command actually prevented an e-fight for me this morning. --Achellios (talk) 18:45, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- keep. All current sources may be blogs, however, several of those (8, 13, 14) are "official" sources - blog entries by someone directly associated with the project. As far as notability, the bots can affect anyone who uses AIM and any of a number of prominent online communities. A livejournal community was created specifically to discuss these bots.Rival (talk) 20:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- The LiveJournal community is a great point. Surely a community with about 1300 members proves something about notability? Eurleif (talk) 21:29, 23 November 2008 (UTC)