Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikirank.net

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Tone 19:28, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikirank.net

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

an unremarkable website, the article has been created in multiple Wikipedias in the past week by same user or same ip address with same text and same references Mardetanha (talk) 09:44, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:15, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, notability is proven by sources --31.0.43.182 (talk) 16:27, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, article contains references to reliable and scientific sources. Wikipedia has about 300 different language editions and rules do not prohibit the translation and transfer of the information to other language editions. Currently, the article has only about 20 language versions. For comparison, nominator user profile (Mardetanha) contains about 240 language versions and mostly without translation ;) --PolskaNauka (talk) 19:07, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, multilinguality of the article cannot be a reason for deletion. For example, there are a lot of commercial products with over 20 (Tesla Model 3), 30 (Audi A4), 40 language versions (Ford Mustang). Only in 2010s automobiles category there are over 1000 articles, and a lot of them have various language versions. Unlike these and other products, wikirank.net is non-profit and research project. Its importance is proven by sources. --188.146.235.91 (talk) 06:10, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

to closing admins, same user is voting to keep the article with different Ip adress Mardetanha (talk) 08:59, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the service is described in the scientific literature, recognized by educational institutions as a tool for quality assessment of Wikipedia, noted as an important finding in Wikimedia Research, and has been presented at international conferences several times. If necessary, I can add additional information to the article. --VeronikaAZ (talk) 19:36, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete many of the references aren't about this project but are to other academic papers in the field; it reeks of a deliberate attempt to pad notability of a project that does not have notability. The only mention I saw was one paper which mentions in passing that one of the authors is working on WikiRank. This is almost certainly created by a person with a WP:COI based on their creating this in 20 languages at once. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:32, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Usage in academic papers isn't enough to establish notability; we need people writing about Wikirank. Mackensen (talk) 12:03, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Usage as the primary method of research in multiple scientific papers is a justification for notability (but whether this is in other WP's is a very peripheral argument--except that that the notability standards of deWP are higher than ours, and this is unchallenged there. I trust themon topics like this. DGG ( talk ) 01:43, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:16, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.