Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fire macha


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 08:07, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Fire macha
Despite asserting that it is the greatest website in the world, its page ranking (and the fact that it's on blogspot) seem to suggest otherwise. Does not meet WP:WEB (as a point of interest) AFAICT. WP is WP:NOT a web directory. - C HAIRBOY (☎) 05:56, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per my nomination. - C HAIRBOY (☎) 05:56, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, obvious vanity entry. --Mr. Vernon 05:59, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete after reading the first sentence. Daniel Case 06:08, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per no, Maustrauser 06:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. The greatest website in the world is too cool for Wikipedia, anyway... yeah, that's it. --Kinu 06:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete! firemacha.com is in my opinion the best A's blog on the internet and with its fast growing readership, deserves an entry here Dukewellington 07:29, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * User's first and only edit. - C HAIRBOY (☎) 15:04, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete! This is clearly a very serious entry designed to shed some light on the history of a great webpage. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by FireMacha (talk &bull; contribs).
 * Don't Delete! I agree with the entire article! Plus it is beautiful prose. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.141.140.179 (talk &bull; contribs).
 * Don't delete! If you're going to criticize or attempt to mitigate the importance of each person who votes to keep the page up, it is only fair you do the same for those who voted against.  Or are you only looking for entries that agree with your position and validate your claim? &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by FireMacha (talk &bull; contribs).
 * It's considered poor etiquette to "stuff the ballot box" (it's not a vote, but putting in more "Don't Delete!" entries makes it look like you're trying to artificially sway the discussion). - C HAIRBOY (☎) 16:12, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable.  As the page says, the site's readership "continues to climb into the double digits."  It needs to climb a bit further before it gets a WP page.  --Thunk 16:02, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Thunk and contra the anonymous trolling. &mdash;  F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( [ TALK ] )  16:08, Feb. 12, 2006
 * Delete, per nom. Kuru 17:47, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete! Firemacha is a great website! &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.198.80.145 (talk &bull; contribs).
 * Comment: User's only edit. Daniel Case 18:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, does not appear to meet WP:WEB. -- Dragonfiend 18:52, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't delete! Any page that is referenced by BaseballProspectus.com and also wins a "best of" award from Deadspin.com is very deserving of a wikipedia page. JessicaAlba 19:03, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * User's first and only edit. - C HAIRBOY (☎) 19:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as sockpuppet-ridden non-notable website. Adrian~enwiki (talk) 00:43, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Ardenn 22:35, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as random non-notable website. Sock flood. Stifle 00:04, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Melchoir 07:26, 14 February 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.