Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ASmallWorld (3rd nomination): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Bulleting a comment |
→ASmallWorld: clarify |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
*'''Comment''' There is ongoing suspicious deletion of critical edits occurring on the asmallworld page. Immediately, after I placed this article up for deletion, the primary person who has been maintaining the advertising tone on the page changed the Alexa ranking to reflect a 400,000 place rise for the site. Within hours a bot corrected the ranking back down to below 500,000. The same user has been creating a highly argumentative and accusative atmosphere - consistently deleting material based on 'non-neutral sources' the same sources are used throughout the article in support of advertising biased non-neutral content. ([[User:Mostlyoksorta|Mostlyoksorta]] ([[User talk:Mostlyoksorta|talk]]) 01:13, 1 April 2014 (UTC)) |
*'''Comment''' There is ongoing suspicious deletion of critical edits occurring on the asmallworld page. Immediately, after I placed this article up for deletion, the primary person who has been maintaining the advertising tone on the page changed the Alexa ranking to reflect a 400,000 place rise for the site. Within hours a bot corrected the ranking back down to below 500,000. The same user has been creating a highly argumentative and accusative atmosphere - consistently deleting material based on 'non-neutral sources' the same sources are used throughout the article in support of advertising biased non-neutral content. ([[User:Mostlyoksorta|Mostlyoksorta]] ([[User talk:Mostlyoksorta|talk]]) 01:13, 1 April 2014 (UTC)) |
||
:*[http://preview.alexa.com/siteinfo/asmallworld.com Get real.] I have explained the change thoroughly → see: [[Talk:ASmallWorld#Alexa rank]] - yet you still choose to make such ill-affected accusations. Early 2012, "asmallworld.net" was ranked, ca. [http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/asmallworld.net 6000]. --[[User:IIIraute|IIIraute]] ([[User talk:IIIraute|talk]]) 02:53, 1 April 2014 (UTC) |
:*[http://preview.alexa.com/siteinfo/asmallworld.com Get real.] I have explained the change thoroughly → see: [[Talk:ASmallWorld#Alexa rank]] - yet you still choose to make such ill-affected accusations. Early 2012, "asmallworld.net" was ranked, at ca. [http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/asmallworld.net 6000].<p>Also, I did not do any content changes, but only reverted [[WP:OR|original research]] and [[WP:SYNTH|synthesis]], i.e. restored the [[status quo ante]]. Please note the [[Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle]], which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted; i.e. "leave the article in the condition it was in before the Bold edit was made". I [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IIIraute&diff=602062489&oldid=602062312 did offer] [[User:Mostlyoksorta|Mostlyoksorta]] my help to rewrite the article - instead, the user did choose to continue his/her edit warring. --[[User:IIIraute|IIIraute]] ([[User talk:IIIraute|talk]]) 02:53, 1 April 2014 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' Appears to, at the very least, satisfy [[WP:GNG]], which is sufficient for inclusion. While fairly weak on [[WP:NCORP]], in the end it doesn't matter, since it satisfies the general notability guidelines. It could stand editing for NPOV. I will not comment as to recent edits or anything about Alexa, as it really doesn't matter at this point, at least as far as keep/delete goes. [[User:Safiel|Safiel]] ([[User talk:Safiel|talk]]) 03:34, 1 April 2014 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' Appears to, at the very least, satisfy [[WP:GNG]], which is sufficient for inclusion. While fairly weak on [[WP:NCORP]], in the end it doesn't matter, since it satisfies the general notability guidelines. It could stand editing for NPOV. I will not comment as to recent edits or anything about Alexa, as it really doesn't matter at this point, at least as far as keep/delete goes. [[User:Safiel|Safiel]] ([[User talk:Safiel|talk]]) 03:34, 1 April 2014 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 03:50, 1 April 2014
AfDs for this article:
- ASmallWorld (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I placed this article up for deletion since it has been listed as containing non-neutral content (advertising) for a long time. I also think think the page lacks notability WP:CORP. To wit, the content on this page links directly to promotion pieces put out by asmallworld when it launched and asmallworld has an extremely low ALEXA ranking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mostlyoksorta (talk • contribs) 13:39, March 31, 2014 (UTC)
- Comment I placed this nomination on behalf of the above user, as his attempt at AfD was incorrectly formatted. I copied the above rational from the incorrect AfD. Safiel (talk) 17:53, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 18:03, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Comment There is ongoing suspicious deletion of critical edits occurring on the asmallworld page. Immediately, after I placed this article up for deletion, the primary person who has been maintaining the advertising tone on the page changed the Alexa ranking to reflect a 400,000 place rise for the site. Within hours a bot corrected the ranking back down to below 500,000. The same user has been creating a highly argumentative and accusative atmosphere - consistently deleting material based on 'non-neutral sources' the same sources are used throughout the article in support of advertising biased non-neutral content. (Mostlyoksorta (talk) 01:13, 1 April 2014 (UTC))
- Get real. I have explained the change thoroughly → see: Talk:ASmallWorld#Alexa rank - yet you still choose to make such ill-affected accusations. Early 2012, "asmallworld.net" was ranked, at ca. 6000.
Also, I did not do any content changes, but only reverted original research and synthesis, i.e. restored the status quo ante. Please note the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted; i.e. "leave the article in the condition it was in before the Bold edit was made". I did offer Mostlyoksorta my help to rewrite the article - instead, the user did choose to continue his/her edit warring. --IIIraute (talk) 02:53, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
- Get real. I have explained the change thoroughly → see: Talk:ASmallWorld#Alexa rank - yet you still choose to make such ill-affected accusations. Early 2012, "asmallworld.net" was ranked, at ca. 6000.
- Keep Appears to, at the very least, satisfy WP:GNG, which is sufficient for inclusion. While fairly weak on WP:NCORP, in the end it doesn't matter, since it satisfies the general notability guidelines. It could stand editing for NPOV. I will not comment as to recent edits or anything about Alexa, as it really doesn't matter at this point, at least as far as keep/delete goes. Safiel (talk) 03:34, 1 April 2014 (UTC)