Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OiNK

OiNK

Wikipedia is not a newsservice. Website notable only once for being raided. Will ^(talk) 17:51, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - "OiNK was the largest source of leaked albums in the world" sounds notable to me GideonF 18:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or move to "Oink (Bittorrent site)". "OiNK" obviously violates our style guidelines regarding the use of superfluous/meaningless internal capitalization. 170.140.210.108 18:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment — if we are to move the article it should be to "Oink (BitTorrent site)". jareha ^(comments) 20:09, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this, the site is notable, just because it's not important to YOU doesn't mean the same to the rest of us. I don't think style guideline should apply, since that is how they presented their name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.178.109.23 (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The style guideline applies regardless of how the site styles its own name. This is a settled matter at WP:MOSTM and moving the page is indisputable. 170.140.210.108 20:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: What is 170.140.210.108's rationale for deletion, except that the article title perhaps should be changed? Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 19:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- My rationale was merely that of the nominator. As the day progresses I would expect the volume of news to increase; notability, of course, is not temporary so we'll need a few weeks to find out whether the site became notable in a lasting way as a result of this incitend. 170.140.210.108 20:11, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - "OiNK was an amazing and notable site. If we're deleting this article for the way they used capitalization in their name, that's ridiculous seeing as that's the way they actually did say their name." sounds notable to me DerfBWH 18:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as per GideonF. As an aside, it would be an interesting challenge to find a online community with almost 200,000 members that doesn't have a Wikipedia entry. --Ori.livneh 19:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I read three news articles about Oink today. None of them mentioned that Oink was a Bittorrent tracker. I had to come here to find that out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.11.27.53 (talk) 19:38, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Possibly the most important private tracker and was one of the most important trackers, full-stop. Also, with regard to the gentleman who was calling for a move because of the capitalisation, I would draw his attention to the page on NeXT which takes account of that name's unusual use of the upper case. --John Lunney 19:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Aha! A dose of WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS should cure you of that notion. 170.140.210.108 20:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - all over the news its definetly notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew22k (talk • contribs) 19:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - See the reason for nomination though. — Northgrove 19:59, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The article was apparently created as a post mortem article, which just comes off as weird to me. If it was notable, why wasn't it here when it was, like, alive and active? Is this a reactionary article creation from the news coverage (this could violate WP:NOTNEWS), or because it did bear notability on its own before? All sorts of things pop up on Wikipedia, but this one didn't until it was dead, which strikes me as strange. I definitely see where the nominator is coming from here. -- — Northgrove 19:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per GideonF. jareha ^(comments) 20:09, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This was an incredibly popular website in the bittorrent community, and deserves at least a mention, as stated above. In fact, at one point, it did have an entry in Wikipedia that was fairly extensive. I have no idea why it was ever taken down to begin with.