Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bouncy

 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 DELETE. Even ignoring the sock puppets, there are only 7 more delete votes than merge votes. However, I can't find any article to merge to, as neither Interdictor Webcam or DirectNIC exists. And the concept is too specific to merge to a generic webcam article. &mdash; J I P | Talk 10:32, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Bouncy
The subject is not notable. Jobarts-Talk 04:01, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Tell that to the 500 people in the IRC chat room watching these guys. Admiral Justin 04:14, September 7, 2005 (UTC) comment by article creator. --PhilipO 17:19, September 7, 2005 (UTC)


 * Clarification: I don't mean to say that DirectNIC is not notable, or that using something like "Bouncy" to let you know that a stream is live isn't a good idea, just that "Bouncy" itself is not notable. I would have said merge, but the article (at the time that I listed it for deletion) didn't have hardly anything worth merging. The content there now could be a start for an article on DirectNIC (or similar.) By the way, 500 people knowing about it isn't really a phenomenon (and I'm one of those 500). (Edited.) Jobarts-Talk 23:45, September 7, 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep but move to New Orleans webcam or something. The fact that someone is broadcasting live 24x7 on the internet from the Big Easy, and has been all week, is surely notable. If you haven't seen their blog, you should check it out. --DavidConrad 04:39, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * keep where it is, and maybe rephrase as a general concept that can be applied to any webcam, citing the Interdictor webcam as an example. &mdash; boredzo (&#x270d;) 04:51, September 7, 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Has the phenomenon of 'bouncy' really taken off _that_ much? I can't say i'd ever heard of it until today. Bouncy could be perhaps mentioned in an article somewhere on wikipedia, but I don't think it needs it's own entry. Also, I don't really think 'bouncy' can possibly be applied as a general term to webcams, seeing as the article mentions it refers instead directly to the No Signal message on the monitor at the back of the webcam image. Kyelewis 06:22, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * To clarify that, I would be more than happy to see an article about the specific webcam, but not the 'bouncy' phenomenon on it's own. Kyelewis 06:23, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Move to an InterdictorWebcam, OutpostCrystal, or DirectNIC page. I'm another of the folks who've been distantly watching this whole ordeal they've been going through, and can attest that it's notable.  A handful of determined folks are managing to keep a large swath of the Internet viable while literally camped out on the 10th floor of a dead office building in a dead city.  That's worth a page.  I just now did my best to flesh out the page some more, but it really needs more work from more people who have been closer to the story.  stevegt 08:56, 7 September 2005 (UTC) Vote actually by anonymous user User:66.166.78.130. Vote then modified by anonymous user User:66.166.78.130

I'm that "anonoymous user", now logged in from same IP. And I'm going to modify my vote again, to clarify: keep the content, move it to another page (I take it Wikipedia doesn't support page renames?). While the page title is wrong, the topic is encyclopedic; very few disaster recovery events are captured in public sources at this level of detail, and Wikipedia's current base of material is painfully thin on this topic. Enterprises consider this proprietary information, leaving practitioners (myself included) in the lurch when it comes to third-party reference material. For example, I worked on a WTC-related recovery, learned a great deal, but can't publish. Grab this material while it's there, put it on another page, encourage more editors (that "to be deleted" banner is a stigma right now) and do it soon, while the sources are still available. Stevegt 01:03, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Hello Stevegt and welcome to Wikipedia - I see you created your account today. I hope you stay with us. You should be aware that since this is only your 4th addition to Wikipedia, and all four edits have been related to this topic, your vote may be discounted. Cheers. --PhilipO 06:17, September 8, 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep but Move to an InterdictorWebcam, OutpostCrystal, or DirectNIC page. Bouncy did not just serve as entertainment for webcam viewers, but also provided a source of comic relief and exchange between viewers and the OutpostCrystal team. snaxxy September 7, 2005 Vote actually by anonymous User:67.64.73.78


 * Keep Bouncy is not just a screensaver or a random collection of pixels. Rather, Bouncy refers to the ideology of normalacy in a time of extreme duress. As NOLA fell into lawlessness, as basic rules of civility werestripped away as quickly as were basic utilities, as the city was besieged by both water and fire while its residents fell over the breaking-point, the bold professionals at DirectNIC succeeded in keeping at least a little corner of the city connected to the world. Bouncy may refer to the screen saver that was the team's mascot, but for those thousands of us who were glued to the news and video feeds that came out of that small office, Bouncy was a symbol of the need to "do as we are doing" and stay the course. The article must stay. User:Blackrobe:Blackrobe Vote actually by anonymous user at User:66.91.152.125


 * Merge anything actually encyclopaedic into one of the countless articles about the hurricane. Not worth an article on its own. Proto t c 09:43, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Merge. Interdictor should get a page, but Bouncy? Totally non-notable. --Moritz 12:49, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete: Wikipedia is not a place to advertise or announce anything. It is not the place to document week-old events.  Remember: this is an encyclopedia:  it is intended to be a tertiary information source.  Geogre 14:49, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete C'mon - not worthy of inclusion. Fake votes always a bad sign too. --PhilipO 17:10, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete It's an article about a clever little graphic on a web feed. Yes, a web feed from NOLA, but it takes a drastic stretch of plausibility to go from hurricane stricken area (very notable) to web feed about area (perhaps notable because few exist) to animated mascot of web feed (shockingly not notable). Oh, and no merge. I really would hate to see the word "Bouncy" be a redirect to a webcam page. --Icelight 17:27, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * delete Article void of encyclopedic value and merit. --Mecanismo 17:30, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge to an appropriate place, per the suggests of others. -Fang Aili 18:33, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Even though some people might find this event notable today, in a month it will be a non-notable event. We must also remember that this is an encyclopedia not a newspaper. Joelito 18:41, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Clear delete and how can such a risibly unimportant topic spur such sockpuppetry?? Dottore So 19:40, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * They aren't really sockpuppets; I recogize some of the names from the #interdictor-chat IRC channel. Jobarts-Talk 21:33, September 9, 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete not encyclopedic. -feydey 21:39, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I would possibly support inclusion of an article on Interdictor, DirectNIC, or Outpost Crystal, as part of the history of a major disaster (and specifically the effect of the Internet on public response to disasters); however "Bouncy" itself is not notable as an article subject, and surely is no more than a short mention, if at all, in an article on one of the subjects above. -- MCB 22:45, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Commendable resolve of DirectNIC employees, but the article is not worthy for inclusion in an encyclopaedia! --GilHamilton 23:33, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete without prejudice; this smacks of Recentism. Nandesuka 04:36, 8 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Merge. I agree that Interdictor/Michael should get a page. But should it be the Directnic page, the Interdictor page or the Operation Crystal page?  Also, James/jwinston wants his own page and should get one as well, imho.  And while we are giving out pages, can I have one too?  Pretty please? ;-) --Astartae 23:41, 7 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. If the Interdictor webcam is notable in some verifiable way, perhaps it could have an article.  But an article dedicated to Bouncy is just silly.  And apparently it's sockbait.  Friday (talk) 13:30, 8 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Move or merge both look like good options right now, based on the above arguments... I will decide which way to vote as the conversation progresses. --Jacqui M Schedler 16:24, 8 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Move or merge. Subject is very notable.  The name is not; I'm an avid reader of the blog but have never been able to see the webcam.  Article should be about the DirectNIC post-Katrina experience, not just the webcam.  Given comments above perhaps a good name for the article would be Operation Crystal, which would reference the event as a whole rather than just the webcam.  Perhaps needs to be cleaned up to a higher standard of quality. Jdavidb 22:17, 8 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Move / Merge I think the content should be merged/moved to DirectNIC and linked to/from Katrina entries as it could be the basis for building an experience record. --Matt Ishida 09:23, 9 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Merge into some other article about Katrina. It does not deserve its own article, but don't lose the content entirely. –CConrad 15:59, 9 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Another mostly trivial-though-seemed-important-to-someone-at-the-time article relevant to Hurricane Katrina. I can't event support a merge. We're geting a bit too flooded (no pun intended) with Katrina minutaie. 128.119.199.102 19:55, 9 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Move or merge, per above. Interdictor's notable, but Bouncy is news t'me. --Jack (Cuervo) 21:19, 9 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. In 3 weeks absolutely nobody is going to care. Corporal 02:07, 10 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep - thats the whole reason wikipedia exists - to document things and events without respect to current interest, but rather to incidental impact....  there are tons of articles about which "nobody cares".  Who cares?  Definately keep! 24.148.27.74 08:44, 10 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Move to another page, editing to keep to new name/topic. I would suggest Outpost Crystal or Interdictor, possibly DirectNIC though that might smack of advertising (or even create a redirect from each, directing to a central page), as these are perhaps the most recognizable names associated with this notable, direct, and extremely up-close source of Katrina NOLA relief efforts.  It would be a shame for this herculean effort to slip into obscurity because some felt the term "Bouncy" was inappropriate.  --Huntster 13:32, 11 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete or merge the content with something more germane -- perhaps some article on activity indicators or screen savers. It might stand as an interesting footnote on another page, but there's no need for it to have its own entry. --Scott F 01:41, 12 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. I am unconvinced of its significance. &#151; Eoghanacht  talk 15:08, 2005 September 12 (UTC)
 * 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.