Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elfwood (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   keep. A lot of sources have been added to the article during the course of the discussion. There may be a debate about whether the sources constitute "significant coverage in reliable sources" but there is no consensus here that they aren't, especially as just about all of the delete !votes came before the article's improvements and in particular do not appear to have considered the book-based sources. Mkativerata (talk) 22:20, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Elfwood
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The article fails the notability guidelines due to a lack of demonstrable impact in independent sources (apart from Wired 1996, where the article does not actually mention Elfwood). Discussed four years ago, there was no consensus with several editors claiming self-evident notability, however in the intervening years no sources to demonstrate impact on the historic record have been added, and Google News today shows only (old) minor and tangential mentions (mostly reviews pointing out it exists as a forum without establishing notability), consequently this is unlikely to be addressed in the near future. Fæ (talk) 06:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  -- Fæ (talk) 06:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.  -- Fæ (talk) 06:53, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Almost all Google hits are false positives; what isn't false positive is trivial. Size of website doesn't matter. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 15:57, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Elfwood has appeared in the news in the past from numerous independent sources, which have not been tapped into. It's not as huge as generic websites, but it is a notable as a niche website. Just a quick look through a google news archive search of "elfwood art" finds this, this, and this. Another quick google news archive search for "elfwood science fiction" finds this. Just use your browsers find function (ctrl+f) to see where Elfwood is mentioned in those sources.  — Code  Hydro  20:01, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Checking these as sources shows (1) just tells me my search session expired, (2) very tangential mention as part of an interview and nothing to establish notability, (3) tangential mention in a child kidnapping case (is the site notable for paedophiles?) and (4) a brief mention in a list of sites establishing the site started in 1996 but nothing else. The nomination seems to be factually supported by the sources you have discovered, thanks. Fæ (talk) 20:13, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Your snappy comment is unfounded and the sarcasm is not appreciated. As I said, those sources are just quick finds. There are certainly more sources out there. Also, the first source is from San Jose Mercury News, titled "TRY THIS, ELFWOOD," and says "Karen Chien, a junior at Leland High School in San Jose, opened an online fiction gallery when she was 12, writing fantasy stories with political themes about alternate universes. She publishes her work on Elfwood (www.elfwood.com), which describes itself as the world's largest science fiction-fantasy art Web site. The Elfwood community is diverse, talented and supportive, she said. 'It is a very interactive place where people are very supportive...'..." Also, here's another quick source that spends half its length covering Elfwood. — Code  Hydro  20:37, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No sarcasm intended, just factually checking the links you provided. I'll not respond further to avoid offending you. Please add any you think are good sources to the article or the article talk page rather than here. Fæ (talk) 21:31, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and TenPoundHammer's analysis.  GregJackP   Boomer!   02:23, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Click Google news. The first result is San Jose Mercury News, which unfortunately requires a pay subscription to view the entire article, but does mention someone notable enough for them to talk about, using Elfwood, and what it is about.  Other articles I find seem to be dead links now, but it had coverage previously.  The only place on Wired magazine I found mentioning elfwood is where they talked about a notable artists who post her work there .   D r e a m Focus  05:14, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That someone notable has posted in an on-line forum does not automatically make a forum notable. If there are a couple of quality sources (such as a national newspaper or magazine) that at some point in the past rated the site the largest or most significant for its type then these would be strong support for notability. Currently there is little to distinguish this site from many others (such as http://www.scififorum.org). Fæ (talk) 06:14, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * A notable artists post their work in that website dedicated to artists, makes it notable. It isn't just an online forum where someone said hi.   D r e a m Focus  17:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note:At 12:05, 15 August 2010 (UTC) Colonel Warden responded to the Article Rescue Squadron alert by adding a citation to an independent reliable source which discusses the topic in detail.
 * Keep It is, in fact, quite easy to find sources which establish notability such as Visual Worlds and Digital Fantasy Painting. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:14, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for Rescue by the Article Rescue Squadron, with no explanation as to why this article should be rescued and how that could happen (per ARS instructions).    Snotty Wong   spout 14:40, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of reliable, secondary sources which verifiably discuss the subject in a non-trivial way. Also fails WP:WEB.    Snotty Wong   spout 14:40, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note:At 16:50, 15 August 2010 (UTC) Colonel Warden responded to the Article Rescue Squadron alert by adding a citation to an independent reliable source which discusses the topic in detail.
 * Comment. This article has been greatly reorganized, expanded, and improved upon by yours truly. The reference list has increased in size by over a factor of 10. Anybody whose vote above was to delete should reconsider based upon the current version. — Code  Hydro  21:19, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per outstanding rescue work by editor CodeHydro. Noteability now well established. FeydHuxtable (talk) 10:34, 20 August 2010 (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.