Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DDR Freak (2nd nomination)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 08:04, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

DDR Freak
Fanforum, no independent sources that establish notability (Newsbank search yields 13 hits, none about the site). Brought here as a contested Prod, a prior AfD resulted in merge and redirect to Dance Dance Revolution, leaning delete. ~ trialsanderrors 08:08, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Weak Delete  Per AfD nomination, site does not have external claims to notability cited. While site may have a large userbase, this does not necessarily establish notability, and doesn't seem to meet those criteria.  While there is an external list of news articles here, some of these only mention it briefly, and the most recent articles don't even seem to mention the site at all.  It could be contested that some of these articles do show some notability (hence, the weak delete), but when many of the articles on that page are simply articles about DDR in general, I'm not so sure.  dougk  (Talk ˑ Contribs) 17:16, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Vote changed to Keep, per text below. Some references have been added, and I don't see any major problems with the article which might be a reason to delete it. -dougk  (Talk ˑ Contribs) 00:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment - When I tried to look at the press link just now, I learned that I've been banned, even though I've never visited the site before. Bummer!  I guess I'll need to try again later... ENeville 21:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Apparently does not meet WP:WEB, despite popularity, and does not provide sources as references or external links, as required by that guideline. For the article to stay, it must provide aforementioned sources. We could simply merge and redirect again, as stated by WP:WEB, but I think delete is better in this case. --N Shar 23:12, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Does not meet notability criteria. My recommendation would be to Userfy the page to someone who is willing to edit it and make it notable.  Phuzion 01:15, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep; it seems like a marginally notable and lasting website, but the absence of referencing weakens that view. Everyking 08:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep; I've just added references in the In the Press section. I'm not sure what else is needed since it's been featured in major newspapers and TV, both nationally and internationally. Is it okay to remove the AfD now? Jasonko888 16:50, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I think the AfD has to remain for at least 5 days (unless closed early under WP:SNOW, or similar provisions). However, this does help a bit.  Would you mind adding links to such articles, transcripts, or other types of sources (as a reference), if they are available?  dougk  (Talk ˑ Contribs) 19:47, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure, I can link to the articles. However, the only records that exist of the TV appearances are on VHS at my home, so that's not possible. Also, the actual link to ddrfreak appears on a separate sidebar article which is not included in the online version. The online article does describe the website as "fans at UC-Berkeley and UCLA created Web sites for fellow enthusiasts..." Jasonko888 22:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * For the TV appearances, and newspaper articles, it's not necessary that they be online, but you can simply cite the date of the coverage, like, "Featured on Larry King Live, July 8, 2002." See WP:CITE. --Elonka 22:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification Elonka. I wonder if the links to the mirrored copies of the articles might be a possible copyright problem now that I think about it (unless you have permission to use the articles from the publishers), so I'm not sure if that's a problem or not if they are linked to.  At least the significance is explained now. -dougk  (Talk ˑ Contribs) 00:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, although that's more of ddrfreak.com's issue than ours (we should remove the links though). For us it's actually more relevant that neither of the two linked articles actually mention ddrfreak at all. They're both about DDR. ~ trialsanderrors 00:50, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's what I wanted to know. This is true, that the articles are on DDR in general, but the fact that the articles interview Jason Ko in specific might be worth something.  I'm really not sure, though, and I'll leave that up to you and other users interested in this discussion.  It may not be enough of a reason to change my vote back, but it does perhaps warrant a bit more discussion and thought. -dougk  (Talk ˑ Contribs) 01:01, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. It has a substantial presence on the web, with over 60K Google hits . , and is a frequently-cited resource (as near as I can tell, the most commonly-cited fan resource for DDR information).  Seems to pass WP:WEB. --Elonka 22:08, 26 October 2006 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.