Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Government Simulation (0th nomination)

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS, so keep. Whilst I intensely dislike the partitioning of votes, having looked at the contribs for the registered users in that section, they are all discounted as are the redlinked users in the other section again, after examining their contribs. Given the apparent bad-faith of the nominator, and the fact that after discounting the raw numerology is just below 2/3 (I get 6d-4k), this is a no consensus. -Splash 21:47, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

American Government Simulation

 * Despite the large number of votes, this never appears to have been added to a main VfD page, so listing now. No vote.  JYolkowski // talk 15:25, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Delete Non-Notable Game, Advertisement Frank 00:01, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * (Please note: The nominator contributed only to the VFD debate over US Government Simulator, his user page, and this VFD.)


 * Comment. Please do not reorganize and categorize votes during a VfD, Jaxl. Sdedeo 21:39, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Votes from registered users

 * Keep Formatting and information can be fixed over time. AGS is the most significant forum-based American political simulation on the Internet and deserves its place on Wikipedia. USGovSim -- imho -- is also significant enough and I think anybody who wants a war over something this stupid should (personal attack removed) stop wasting oxygen. Incidentally, here's the official AGS position on the matter, FWIW -- http://www.forumforfree.com/forums/index.php?mforum=ags&showtopic=58721jj_frap


 * Delete Joffey's comment makes me believe that it's either vanity or an ad. Karmafist 03:47, 18 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. Deleting in vengence really isn't that good of an idea. --RobbieFal 05:40, 18 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. While the community seems rather small, it is growing at a good pace, I fully agree with.erm..whoever made " It's an informative article about an informative game " etc etc. - Mrdie


 * Delete. WP:NOT a web directory.  Alexa rank of 3,000,000 (but it's gone up 2,700,000 places in the past three months!).  Less than 500 members on the forums, far short of my threshold of 50,000. --Carnildo 18:33, 18 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Whilst I respect Jakob Huneycutt to the highest degree, this is less notable than my daily lunch menu.-Ashley Pomeroy 23:44, 18 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep and censure the users from usgovism trying to abuse WikiPedia to sort out their own petty rivalries. WikiPedia is under no obligation to be "fair", and especially not to be "balanced".  One game/site/whatever being notable does not automagically make its competitors notable.  WikiPedia is not a venue for advertising.  Entries document existing notable whatsits, they don't make them notable through advertisement.  To say that "if x gets an article, you're being unfair to y" displays a stunning ignorance of WikiPedia and its aims, and to throw a tantrum as y'all have done shows not just ignorance but immaturity too. --fuddlemark 17:10, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep Encyclopedic article about an online political forum simulating aspects of government, not just an advert for an online game as stated above. Alf 23:49, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't think this is notable and if a more authoritative nomination were made, I would vote to delete. This nomination is clearly bad faith, however, and for that the usgovsim people should be permanently censured and sent to their rooms for throwing a pathetic and childish tantrum. Dottore So 19:35, 23 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep The history of AGS ought to be allowed on Wiki. Govsims are an expanding form of online gameplay and sims such as AGS, USGovsim, USSS, and TWS are just the beginning. And if there is any question about who I am or why I'm calling for a Speedy Keep, I am *THE* Admin of USGovsim. A couple overzealous players may be out to harm AGS (and have been rightly ostracized for their spamming) but I have found AGS to be a very reputable game worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia and strongly believe that any discussion about deletion is in bad taste. thrasherssyn3443 11:39 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Note: The above edit is signed as "Thrasherssyn3443", by User:Thrasherssyn3443, but the username link goes to the nonexistant user User:Wiki Will Caldwell. --Carnildo 18:28, 26 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete per Carnildo. Nandesuka 02:45, 4 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete as non-notable. -- Kjkolb 06:40, September 4, 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep This is an interesting and informative article.  Eterry 21:02, 5 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Non-notable. / Peter Isotalo 20:16, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment AGS is probably the largest government simulation on the net and as far as government simulations go, it is probably the most important one out there right now. It has made significant contributions and advances as far as Sims go and it has influenced several other government sims.  I'm not voting on this one way or the other.  If people want to vote it off because it's non-notable, then I don't have much of a problem with that even if I think they are incorrect in their assessment.  What irritates me, however, is that the attempt to delete was initiated by (apparently) an anonymous source, who hasn't contributed to Wikipedia at all other than for this article and the government simulation article.  It leads me to believe that this is all nothing more than an attempt to carry out a grudge.  I won't really shed any tears if this article is deleted, though.  It seems it's more trouble than its worth with all the trolls coming in.  But I will say I strongly disagree with Carnadillo.  His standards are a bit absurd.  It's not clear how ANY simulation could maintain 50,000 members.  That doesn't mean that all net simulations are not notable.  Government sims with over 200 members are considered very large by their relative standards and within the simming community, a Sim with 200-500 members would be very well known. I would say notable Sims of the past include NGS2, AOL Senate Sim, and Senate Sim. Jakob Huneycutt 12:30, 08 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep, its nice to have a page on it.

Votes from IP addresses, very new users, and unsigned votes

 * DELETE If USG is up for deletion, than so should AGS. Fair's fair after-all.  We want to keep wikipedia fair and balanced, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.16.131.105 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 17 August 2005


 * Delete If USGovSim is up for deletion and is considered a "Non-Notable Game", AGS should certainly be deleted with it. Either delete both or keep both.Eric3446


 * Delete It's poorly formatted and uninformative.msrpotus


 * Keep. Members of another, smaller simulation are trying to start a flame war. Several of these individuals have discussed the plan here. This is a serious, though sadly typical, breach of Wikipedia Policies and Guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.196.120 (talk • contribs) 23:46, 17 August 2005
 * That thread, assuming it existed, has either been deleted or removed from anonymous view. Al 14:12, 18 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. This is an immature attempt by several members of a smaller simulation trying to 'declare war' on AGS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobschmidt (talk • contribs) 00:25, 18 August 2005


 * Keep. It's an informative article about an informative game. Regardless of what's going on at any other sites, AGS is now a community, and deserves to be defined as such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.210.93.177 (talk • contribs) 09:18, 18 August 2005


 * DELETE: Non notable site. This is just a glorified ad. Furthermore, AGS already is mentioned in "government simulation", which is appropriate. It deserves a mention as a kind of simulation, but does not warrant a full page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.237.181.35 (talk • contribs) 12:38, 18 August 2005


 * Keep. While 500 members may not meet the vaunted "Carnildo Standard", the number is significant in that it is arguably the largest online government sim communities of all those mentioned. It is short-sighted and asinine to set arbitrary limits on size and popularity. Doing so is to say that polka great Frankie Yankovic is "non-notable" because he was never as big as Elvis. Context matters, people. (Disclosure: I am involved in this sim, but have been involved in Wikipedia (sans login) significantly longer.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bcarlson33 (talk • contribs) 03:13, 19 August 2005


 * Delete It's nothing more than an advertisement, and it certainly doesn't merit its own unique entry..mrzippy13 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.26.194.77 (talk • contribs) 08:45, 21 August 2005

Discussion

 * Comment: I have no problem letting AGS have a wikipedia page. I DO have a problem with the nonsense and double standards going on with trying to have USG's page deleted. Especially when those voting for deletion are random people who have no right no pass judgment about a subject they know nothing about.

--John Joffey, Founder of USGovsim and current Co-Admin


 * Comment: This is simply not a flame war. All we would like is for our article to be able to be on Wikipedia. We did not expect a full out frontal assault from AGS in an effort to remove the article. We only want Wikipedia to be fair. Either keep both or delete both. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.115.55.215 (talk • contribs) 00:09, 18 August 2005


 * Comment: There is no evidence to support these specious claims of "frontal assault from AGS"; in fact, the evidence that does exist suggests the opposite. AGS administrators have said on their forums that they encourage members to join other sims, and have even posted a link to the simulation in their web links. The announcement is here. Wikipedia should not be a playground for petty revenge based on imaginary, non-existent "frontal assaults." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.196.120 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 18 August 2005


 * Comment: Once again AGS should be allowed to keep their page. All the Admins of USG agree on this. We are however, miffed, that there is a huge deletion attempt going on against our page, brought on by ignorant people with nothing better to do. I implore Wikipedia Mods to end both the deletion attempt here, and against the USG page.

--John Joffey

able. --Al 14:06, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. This is a bad faith VfD. If not for that I would vote delete as non-not

Keep this cool page! The sim deserves it. This page is NOT and advertisement, and the o
 * 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.