Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acmeshorts

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:04, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Acmeshorts
Non-notable website, Alexa ranking of 3,796,845, 32 unique Google hits. RickK 23:41, May 19, 2005 (UTC) Hi, it's me TheBuyer. Are you seriously deleting this entry because you never heard of Acmeshorts and no one else really has either? That's shortsighted and suggests you've misread our intentions. No one credible on the site wants the lowest common denominator to show up, we don't even have any advertisers, pop-ups, mailing lists, promotions, nothing. The only thing site traffic would do for Acme is slow the site down and we hate that. The fact is, Acmeshorts does exist and deserves a definition. Cheers! TheBuyer Hi, TheBuyer again. This is what I'm saying, you're misreading our intentions. Where in this entry do you see any kind of solicitation or promotion, it's all just facts about how/why it exists that's all. You're assuming Acmeshorts wants you there. Why would you assume that?
 * Delete per WP:VAIN. --bainer 01:06, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. None of the Google hits give a sample of credible third party references. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:06, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Vegaswikian 06:20, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, site promo. Megan1967 07:32, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
 * :'( Mr. Pony 10:34, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not an ad agency... there are other channels to go through that don't make you look like the same scum that spams people's inboxes with Viagra. --Yoshi348 17:08, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * We're not deleting it based on us not having heard of it, but instead based on its demonstrated obscurity (very low Alexa ranking, few google hits). Please, don't take it the wrong way--it's simply that this website isn't notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia. Please keep contributing on more noteworthy topics. Thanks, Meelar (talk) 17:50, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Will Disney here. We get 10,000 hits a day on AcmeShorts.  WikiPedia certainly has space to store a serious entry about a web site dedicated to writing.  This Wikipedia entry provides us with no "advertising" value, and we don't care about advertising as AcmeShorts is a money-losing site with no profit method.  Why should something obscure not be in an encyclopedia, if the entry is real and contains facts and information that contribute to the greater common knowledge pool?  Maybe one of our many daily visitors would like some information about AcmeShorts, and will look it up in Wikipedia.  Isn't that the point?
 * Disney again: Are you saying you don't allow obscure things in the encyclopedia?  Normal encyclopedias have very, very obscure things in them.  Things that probably no one ever looks at.  Certainly there must be pages in the Wikipedia that people look at less than the AcmeShorts entry.  It's not like the Wikipedia has a page space limit.  I mean, sure, AcmeShorts is obscure, but it has been visited almost 2 million times now.
 * Delete not notable --JiFish 18:10, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
 * What does that mean - not notable? We think it's notable?  How does it harm Wikipedia if we setup a genuine entry with real information about a real writing site that has existed for several years?  Isn't that the idea?

TheBuyer again. Hi! from one of your pages and pages of rules...

If an article is "important" according to the above (of course, this may be controversial, and can be discussed on the article's talk page, using this policy as a guideline), it should not be deleted on the basis of it being:

1. insufficiently important, famous or relevant, or  2. currently small or a stub. What part of this am I failing to understand?

Mr. Pony here. I'm with Megan1967. I think the so-called "Google Test" is inherently flawed. Seriously, though, as far as our insignificance goes, we're all trying to not take that the wrong way, but I think we need a little clarification. Could one of you give us an example of what you think is the least significant site that is just significant enough to merit an inclusion in Wikipedia? Thanks!!

Also, where is the discussion, all I see are user names weighing in with Votes but very little actual discourse. -TheBuyer


 * Delete. Two million hits in thirty months just isn't that much.  Not encyclopediac. --Carnildo 20:42, 20 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't see how personal attacks will help make your case, Carnildo. --Mr. Pony Friday, four fifty-seven p.m. Eastern
 * Personal attacks? What are you, a fucking moron?  You seem to be no more capable of recognizing a personal attack than you are at writing an encyclopedia article!  Maybe you should go back to grammar school -- I hear it's a good place to learn such things.  Or maybe you never went there in the first place: it would explain a lot about you.  I see from your userpage that someone's accused you of taking dumps in the yard.  You deny it, of course, but we all know the truth.  Grammar school could help you with that little problem, too.  And while we're on the subject of you, what sort of a name is "Mr. Pony"?  Is it maybe a reference to your lack of stature?  Or maybe your size "down there"?  Or are you just one of those "cutesey" guys who likes such things?  Maybe you should try "Mr. Jackass".  Or perhaps "Mr. Mule" would better suit your ancestry. --Carnildo 21:49, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Well, Carnildo, I guess I'd like to thank you for showing me what a real personal attack is all about. I must say, I really am surprised that you were able to discern from my few brief posts that I am indeed of mixed ancestry (my father is a Third Generation Japanese American, and my Mother a European American; her father from Italy, her mother an Irishwoman from Canada). What really surprises me, however, is how gleefully you compare me to a mule. I thought that kind of racism was a thing of the past; although I admit that in my travels throughout the world, I have tended to keep to large cities, where "half-breeds" such as myself are more tolerated. Your other attacks about me not going to grammar school, or about me being short or having a small penis, I can sort of write off as being playful (your way of saying "hello", maybe?) but your exuberant racism is another story. I can only assume that you are alone in your racism, and that your racist ways do not reflect in any way on the Wikipedia community. I hope I am right in thinking this.  -- Mr. Pony


 * Disney: What is the hangup here about notability? Or being encyclopedic?  I have a news flash you:  The Encyclopedia Brittanica isn't reader-edited!  You guys are something different.  I honestly don't understand why you wouldn't want to include information just because you consider the topic to be too obscure.  I mean, this is an encyclopedia that publishes in Esperanto!  What is the harm in having an entry on AcmeShorts?


 * Delete. You're stupid site is too crappy for WIKIPEDIA (AWSOME)! Go pormote you're dump-tent site somewhere else--KiNGWiKiPede 21:09, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
 * The above is the User's first edit. Those of us who have been here for a while disavow the tone of his vote.  RickK 21:18, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

TheBuyer says: See Flash Fiction Acmeshorts is Flash Fiction and is every bit as "Notable" as the provided reference links at the bottom of the article and is NOT a broken link unlike the FIRST link in that article.

My name is Corvon Gundtsdottir, aka Johnny Jinky and I am an acme shorts contributor! Im begging you to take our site seriously, because we enjoy writing stories and we think we have a shot at becoming succesful like other major web players such as Slate, Yahoo or even amazon.com! (Wouldn't it be embarrassing for your corporation if we became big and you had erased our definition?!) OK so some of our stories may not be Puzinger Prize winners but that doesn't mean they're not worth reading or don't contain literatury merit. Plus, If you let us stay on your site i would be willing to contribute some entries on the Wikipedia. I don't have a particular field of expertise "per se" but I could maybe research some topics for you such as computers or others you assigned. If you are interested please tell me who I should send my resume to, for I would love the opportunity to further discuss whether I could work for your organization. I would love to be part of such a "think tank" as Wikipedia. Even if you don't want me to work there maybe you could at least forward my resume to other similar websites, like the Encyclopedia Britanica. I do not wish to work for sites dealing with sexual content, however. I have to go meet some friends now, but thanks for your time. I will check for your response tomorrow around 3:30pm.
 * Delete. Notable generally refers to any subject that has had a relatively impressive impact on society in general.  Thus, Amazon.com, Homer Simpson and breadbox all get articles.  A writing site, however good, far out of the mainstream and with no demonstratable impact on society is inherently not notable.  If you can prove notability (eg impact on society) I'd love to be proven wrong. Incidentally, if it's as notable flash fiction as the flash fiction at the bottom of that article, why don't you just put it there as a link, rather than as a seperate entry? -- Scimitar
 * Comment: Incidentally, while going through the pages of rules, did you notice the ones about POV? Even if the article were kept it would be kept in a NPOV format. -- Scimitar
 * Delete - Bye bye vanitycruft. --FCYTravis 23:51, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Disney: Is that tone necessary?  I'm really surprised by the tenor of the comments above.  Believe it or not, we thought we were supporting the wikipedia by creating an entry there.
 * Mr. Pony: I agree. I mean, I know it's a lot to expect to be taken seriously, but the editors' comments (with a few notable exceptions) have been gleefully dismissive, school-yard elitist, and even racist. I realize that an open encyclopedia must have some standards, but the content and tone of these comments has to make one wonder about the people setting these standards, and by extension, the standards themselves.
 * I AM THE KING OF THE WORLD
 * Hey guy. What's wrong guy?

Corvon Gundtsdottir here again. Sorry it took me so long to get back! Meeting my friends and hanging out with them turned out to take a lot longer than I expected, that's why I didn't have the chance to touch base again with you Wikipedia guys until now. One thing I forgot to mention in my last posting is that I am totally interested in karate. I haven't actually taken classes but I've always wanted to, plus I've seen probably a hundred movies (including Hong Kong Hustle which is one of the most intense films I've seen, like, ever). My friends are always amazed at how much I know about karate. What I'm driving at is, I would be totally up for writing an article on karate for the Wikipedia. I don't know a lot about the history but I could do the section about karate movies, and/or put together some diagrams showing the different kinds of moves they do. I don't draw, but I could describe the moves and techniques to your illustrator so there could be a cool visual next to the article. I haven't looked at your current entry but I'll bet I know more different kinds of kickass moves than what's up there now. I have to go to the store in a minute but I'll check back in tomorrow about 2:30pm. Let me know if you're interested in having me write about karate. I could do other topics as well but I'd be totally psyched to do the one on karate.
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.