Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Netphoria
Might not be encyclopedia material: "On September 5 2003 Netphoria held its annual "hot dog eating contest". mayfuck beat out my best buddy tariq, Netphoria's long-time champion wiener-chugger, by 16 wieners in the last 30 seconds of the final round." Wyllium 04:39, 2004 Aug 17 (UTC)
- Might not be? Is not. Delete. -- Ferkelparade π 07:03, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Someone has apparently confused Wikipedia with a weblog. Delete. Average Earthman 08:24, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Not notable, delete. But do we have anything about web forums on Wikipedia:What's in, what's out? And do we have a general criterion about, let me call it the "minimum interested audience size" for an article? The non-notable-high-school-retentionist camp, which now that I think of it has been somewhat muted lately, generally argued that high schools were important to "thousands" of alums, implying that an article should be kept if there were thousands of people potentially interested in it. By that reasoning, a web forum with three thousand members could quality. I, of course, would like to see the bar set much higher than "thousands." [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 12:47, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Delete: Quickly, while the "It's a fact so it goes in and we're not paper and this is important to the people who read it" folks are on vacation in Truth or Consequences, New Mexico. (Just kidding. I have a long voting record on forums.) Geogre 13:38, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Non-notable. Their own words "one of the longest-running and most popular Smashing Pumpkins message boards and fansites" seems to indicate that Netphoria is only one of many "longest-running and most popular" websites devoted to Smashing Pumpkins. It is probably just exagerated hype. Forum memership of 3,083 is not very many for a "long runing" forum, however long that might be. Forums tend to attract people who post a little and then drop out but remain listed among members forever. In forums something like 10% of the members usually produce about 90% of the posts. I'm probably still listed on countless forums I've forgotten entirely. For any website to have its own article requires notability. It should stand out in some way, should be extra-famous or notorious. Large membership alone shouldn't enter into consideration at all. I don't see 3,083 as a large membership in any case. Jallan 15:15, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Wikipedia is not a web directory, and it's certainly not a place for stupid comments about various forumgoers' genitalia. — Gwalla | Talk 16:26, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. This was, for many years, the authoritative Smashing Pumpkins news and fan site, but with the band's breakup it's degenerated into just another Web forum populated by angsty teenagers. This is deserving of an external link, not an article of its own. Austin Hair 04:40, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)
- What are we, a repository of crappy websites? "Dee L (Cursing word with "ing") eat" Seriously though, this is ridiculous idea. Also what is with the thing about sitting on a net and talking about life? Some kind of stupid joke, that is all I am going to say. DELETE
- Keep, this is a fairly popular website. anthony (see warning) 20:53, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Delete as soon as possible. I will be happy to come and deal with this as soon as the debate period has passed. DJ Clayworth 21:10, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)