Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GBStv


 * 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 no consensus. --Sam Blanning(talk) 16:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

GBStv
Description of an obscure service offered to members of the SomethingAwful forums. Also worthless fancruft of members of the SomethingAwful forums. RabinicLawyer 22:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, Anyone from the internet can update the playlist, and joining is free, unlike something awfuls $10 to get in policy. Also Lowtax has nothing to do with GBStv, but Putnam. jordanhass 12:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep separate from somethingawful Fleft 04:39, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable fancruft. incog 22:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, WDMA, hpj.cc, typhoon and all the websites that goons actually visit have been deleted from the Wikiepedia. This site is even less popular than gbs.fm which doesn't have its own page. Not Notable and I don't think it meets WP:WEB --TrollHistorian 23:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment note that TrollHistorian is most likely a puppt of RabinicLawyer or the other way around. They have spent almost all their edits nominating Something Awful related articles for deletion. See JoshuaZ 00:07, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I am not a sock puppet and I don't appreciate your accusations. I am free to have my own opinions and agree with others. Go look at the IPs we are different people. --TrollHistorian 00:20, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I love the article and the site in particular, but, at the moment I'm typing this, Alexa's rank of 172,706 makes it a little non-notable--at least for now, but it's moving up a lot. --Slgrandson 00:19, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep this is a great article, also Comment I have requested that admins investigate TrollHistorian and RabinicLawyer, there's nothing I hate more than meatpuppets. Kuralyov 00:32, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep this service is offered to everyone, not just SA, and I find your want to remove everything SA offensive. --Liface 01:32, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - Why should the article be kept? It doesn't meet WP:WEB. --TrollHistorian 02:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete no assertion of WP:WEB notability. Ashibaka tock 03:03, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge with main SA article until notability is firmly established. Gail Wynand 04:10, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete where are you going to find published sources for this? Kotepho 04:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * http://gbs.tv/ --Liface 05:57, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Haha I will just make up some elaborate bullshit, put it on a web site, and then write Wikipedia articles about it. Then my plan for world domination will be complete! --Afed 13:10, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Cool it with the sarcasm. As you probably have already figured out, the site is not elaborate bullshit. --Liface 05:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge with main SA article until notability is firmly established (per Gail Wyland). --ElKevbo 04:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Donkay ote 04:27, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - Can you give a reason? It doesn't meet WP:WEB. --TrollHistorian 02:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable. MrKeith2317 04:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge per most of the reasons above -- Hirudo 04:36, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete 24.251.0.143 05:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * That was my vote, I forgot to sign in Deleuze 05:02, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep WTF? non-notable? its more notable than jesus!
 * Unsigned vote by User:Junkevil who seems to have signed up only for this vote --Afed 21:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - How does this article meet WP:WEB? --TrollHistorian 02:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep seprate from something awful, completely free isn't spam at all, notable for many reasons.--The_stuart 20:24, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - But does it even belong on wikipedia? How does this article meet WP:WEB? --TrollHistorian 02:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * While I agree, judging the article souly on WP:WEB it doesn't hold up much. I beleive this because GBStv is condiserabley new (less than a year old) and, because it is free and nonprofit and created by SA Goons (who tend to not be intrested in the opinions of nonGoons) has received little to no noteriety. However, if you look beyond these factors, GBStv is a prime example of Web 2.0. This is the first television station that is controlled completely by users without any comercial or financial entanglements. GBStv is the wave of the future and, that alone entitles it to have it's own article on Wikipedia. --The_stuart 16:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I see no reason to delete it. User:CurtDogg
 * Comment - I would like to hear your opinion on why it is notable enough to keep. --TrollHistorian 02:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep There are no real reasons to delete this article. GBStv has no affiliation with Something Awful other than it was created by member's of the SA forums.  Also, the fact that GBStv is less popular than GBS.fm hardly seems to warrant a deletion from Wikipedia.  If anything, the fact that it's less popular seems to be more of a reason for Wikipedia to include an article so it can educate the public about GBStv. User:sswanso
 * Comment But notability has not been established. For instance even the history of website is not referenced. How does this article meet WP:WEB? --TrollHistorian 02:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Abstain, this article borders on non-notability. Kuzaar 19:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Smerge to Something Awful. Stifle (talk) 00:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep GBStv is quite notable for what it is and it's a service that's available to everyone. I think the article needs work and that it would read better without the "history" section, but it shouldn't be deleted. -- goatasaur 17:25, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - There are many services available on the internet but they don't get their own wikipedia page. Can you show why this article deserves to be documented according to WP:WEB?


 * 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.