User:Syphonbyte/The fundamentally broken nature of WP:WEB



WP:WEB generally is cited whenever somebody wants to delete an article or category having anything to do with something like the internet. For example, the article Dark Galaxy was recently deleted because it didn't satisfy WP:WEB. I would appreciate all those who cite WP:WEB to please pull their heads out of their collective asses when doing so for a number of reasons.

Guidelines vs. Policy
WP:WEB is a guideline, not policy, meaning it does not always have to be followed to the letter, and in fact can be ignored entirely if the situation permits. Generally this fact goes unnoticed, though, and people cite it in a similar way that they site WP:V and similar policies. WP:WEB is in many ways a derivative of these policies, however as the page clearly states at the top, WP:WEB itself is not policy. Except in obvious cases, then, it's a good idea to back up a claim with something other than a single guideline.

Fundamental Broken Nature
WP:WEB is also fundamentally broken. The wording of WP:WEB is such that anything present on the internet is subject to it. The requirements for web notability obviously were designed to cover web sites, however they fail to recognize that web content often does not recieve coverage in major publications, which is the main requirement for notability, due to the very nature of web content. Instead, it's usually blogged or thrown around the internet like monkey shit, both of which are usually not considered major or reliable publications. Thus, for a long time, the article Ogame would not have been allowed under WP:WEB because there weren't really any external published articles about it. Ogame has over 2 million players though; that's more than The Matrix Online, which is considered to be covered under a different notability guideline based on the fact that you can purchase it at a Wal-Mart. Broken? I think so.

Conclusion
Citing WP:WEB, while a good way to bolster your point, isn't a surefire way to kill an article that you don't really like. Instead, try a different approach. Many articles have other minor flaws that can be used to get them deleted, such as a lack of references or sources. (This is not actually criteria for deletion either, however if you get enough minor article problems together, you get a problem big enough to delete the article over, or so I'm told.) Remember, of course, that WP:WEB can be ignored on occassion when everybody's just making fools of themselves.