Talk:Oink's Pink Palace

Notability

I find it funny that it's now considered notable only after it's been shutdown ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.66.37.28 (talk) 20:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

OiNK has played relatively large role in the internet piracy scene, being known as THE tracker for music for the last few years. I would say it is at least as relevant as Suprnova (which also has a fairly detailed Wikipedia entry). Putting this article up for deletion was a ridicules idea.Random6 19:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

pwned —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.54.132.251 (talk) 17:30, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

OiNK is now the subject of extensive coverage on several news outlets, among them the Telegraph, the BBC, the Süddeutsche Zeitung, Reuters, the International Herald Tribune, and others. If it wasn't notable before, it definitely is now. --Ori.livneh 17:09, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Unless there is more verifiable information about OiNK, this article should be deleted. Nothing is being said about OiNK in the media that is useful as Wiki material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.189.176.236 (talk) 18:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Ridiculous that this would be considered for deletion...Oink has previously generated extensive media coverage, even before its raid...and should have had an entry to begin with.

QFT —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.45.189 (talk) 18:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Anyway OiNK made some kind of history or news coverage... let's start deleting history ? .luizhp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.28.13.198 (talk) 19:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

There is no reason to delete this article. --John Lunney 19:18, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to be off-topic but do you really think they'll go after all 180,000 members? It seems only logical they'd go after the big fish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.186.30.235 (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

You cant be serious if you think they're going after 180,000 members. HA HA HA —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.104.222 (talk) 19:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Either this article expands with more information about OiNK and it's services, or it should get deleted. A blurb about the media hype is not enough for an article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.189.176.236 (talk) 19:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Rather than promote its deletion, why not hang around for a few days to see if anything else gets added? 70.230.18.214 20:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

You have got to be kidding me. How is this site not notable enough? Is 180,000 members -- enough people to fill out the capitol cities of several U.S. States -- not notable enough? OiNK membership is a coveted thing, judging by the numerous request threads on forums around the internet. This article needs to be expanded, but as is should not be facing deletion. 69.224.75.57 21:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The site not being notable before it was shut down does not mean that it is not shut down now. The site is now under investigation and that makes it notable. Not to be offensive, but Lee Boyd Malvo was not notable until he was involved in the Beltway sniper attacks. Oink deserves to be mentioned, because whether or not it was notable before, it is definitely notable now. The-bus 21:47, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

OiNK.cd?

The title of this article should be OiNK.cd, not OiNK, considering the site was called OiNK.cd officially, OiNK.me.uk before the switchover. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tenthkarma (talk • contribs) 19:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

or "OiNK's Pink Palace" which is the actual name. oink.cd and oink.me.uk were just the domain names. Whysyn 20:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

You mean "Oink's Pink Palace", in complaince with our style guidelines regarding nonstandard capitalization. —BurnDownBabylon 23:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Well if you look up Google it isn't Google.com, also does that capitalization rule apply with names or proper nouns