Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aliceffekt: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Closing debate, result was delete |
←Blanked the page |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
|||
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' |
|||
<!--Template:Afd top |
|||
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> |
|||
The result was '''delete'''. [[User:Spartaz|Spartaz]] <sup>''[[User talk:Spartaz|Humbug!]]''</sup> 22:03, 30 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
=== [[Aliceffekt]] === |
|||
:{{la|Aliceffekt}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aliceffekt|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 September 21#{{anchorencode:Aliceffekt}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks">[https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Aliceffekt Stats]</span>) |
|||
:({{Find sources AFD|Aliceffekt}}) |
|||
'''Delete''' The article fails to establish the notability of the subject. Therefore it should be deleted.{{unsigned|Popnrock}} |
|||
{{notavote}} |
|||
*'''Delete''' - Subject fails [[WP:GNG]]. [[Special:Contributions/101.61.177.148|101.61.177.148]] ([[User talk:101.61.177.148|talk]]) 16:45, 11 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Delete''' : Unambiguous advertising or promotion. --[[User:Emilysantoss|Emilysantoss]] ([[User talk:Emilysantoss|talk]]) 08:57, 18 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Delete''' : Unreliable Content, which is not up to the mark of Wikipedia criteria, so it should be deleted. ([[User talk: Ianjoy8311|talk]]) |
|||
'''Comment''' This AfD was never listed in the AfD log, so I will add it to today's log even though the discussion was created more than 10 days ago. --''[[User:Bonadea|bonadea]]'' <small>[[Special:Contributions/Bonadea|contributions]] [[User talk:Bonadea|talk]]</small> 17:45, 21 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Keep''' In addition to the fact that the article already includes a review in [[CNET]] and a fairly long interview in [[Indiegames.com]] (as well as some more trivial coverage), it is very easy to find more coverage - more reviews in [[CNET]] and [[Jayisgames]], and other interviews, too. I suspect the nominator was not aware of [[WP:BEFORE]]. The article is not at all promotionally written, but it could do with some more sources. I'll try to add some as soon as possible. --''[[User:Bonadea|bonadea]]'' <small>[[Special:Contributions/Bonadea|contributions]] [[User talk:Bonadea|talk]]</small> 17:54, 21 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
**'''Comment''' : Being mentioned on CNET doesn't mean it should have automatically it's encyclopedic page. Author of this entry is obviously doing unambiguous advertising to an uncertain notability. [[User:Emilysantoss|Emilysantoss]] ([[User talk:Emilysantoss|talk]]) 23:19, 21 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
:::No, being ''mentioned'' in a reliable source does not automatically confer notability, but the core of [[WP:N|notability]] is [[WP:SIGCOV|significant coverage]] in several reliable sources, as discussed above. --''[[User:Bonadea|bonadea]]'' <small>[[Special:Contributions/Bonadea|contributions]] [[User talk:Bonadea|talk]]</small> 14:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Quebec|list of Quebec-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 13:54, 22 September 2014 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians|list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 13:55, 22 September 2014 (UTC)</small> |
|||
*'''Delete''' Coverage is good but not substantial enough to create notability[[Special:Contributions/108.92.216.138|108.92.216.138]] ([[User talk:108.92.216.138|talk]]) 15:23, 27 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
*Some more sources added. It is cause for some concern that all the people who have !voted "delete" are very inexperienced (in terms of their number of edits), and in a couple of cases known to be paid editors. The AfD process is, of course, open for all editors to participate, but I'm getting the feeling that there is canvassing going on somewhere, for some purpose I can't quite understand. In any case there is an embarrassment of sources out there, so [[WP:GNG]] is clearly met. --''[[User:Bonadea|bonadea]]'' <small>[[Special:Contributions/Bonadea|contributions]] [[User talk:Bonadea|talk]]</small> 16:24, 27 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Delete''' considering the flighty attitudes of editors overall about WHAT exactly creates notability, I'm not surprised about this debate. Better articles have been put into AFD for less...[[User:Chastized|Chastized]] ([[User talk:Chastized|talk]]) 01:09, 28 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Leaning Delete''' While I agree with {{u|Bonadea}}'s assessment of the curious case of the potential canvassing on this thread, I am still inclined to agree with the majority; there are a lot of sources (even on the page as it stands), but most of them simply verify that Aliceffekt worked on one project or another. Others are interviews (which border on being primary sources), and a (very) small minority deal with Aliceffekt in detail as a person. ''IF'' the article can be improved with new secondary sources and substantially more body added I am happy to change my opinion, but as it currently stands I do not think Aliceffekt meets Wiki's notability criteria. [[User:Primefac|Primefac]] ([[User talk:Primefac|talk]]) 18:59, 29 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Delete''' lacks substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. --[[User:Bejnar|Bejnar]] ([[User talk:Bejnar|talk]]) 20:14, 29 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div> |
|||