Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GameRanger (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. As noted below, vandalism will be dealt with as a wholly separate issue. (This discussion failed to mention the previous AFD in 2006 which can be found here). — CharlotteWebb 13:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

GameRanger
Probably doesn't meet Notability (web), no references, no indication of significance or importance. Polly (Parrot) 20:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

The inability to keep the page accurate due to the persistant vandalism should also be noted. Simply look at the logs.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Game-related-related deletion discussions.   --  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined  /  C ) 08:14, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.   --  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined  /  C ) 08:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete per WP:CSD: "web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant" and block the users who keep removing the AFD tag. Percy Snoodle (talk) 09:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete if left in its current state, with just one independent source; Keep if the sources mentioned below are added to the article. Percy Snoodle (talk) 11:30, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the list of video game deletions. Someoneanother 15:32, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete per Percy Snoodle. Article has suffered from heavy vandalism and is probably unrepairable. Article also has no citations and contains potentially libellous content (probably added as part of the vandalism).--Gazimoff (talk) 17:53, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Trivial mentions at apple.com and other freeware download sites.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined  /  C ) 17:56, 20 March 2008 (UTC) Changing to Keep per google news articles. Definitely establishes notability.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined  /  C ) 17:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Plenty of sources (http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=GameRanger+mac&btnG=Search+Archives&ie=UTF-8&um=1) and vandalism isn't a reason to delete.  Please do a web/news search before voting to delete.  Remember we are looking for notability of the topic not of the article.  Hobit (talk) 23:38, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I did do a search for material, however the article is being continually vandalised by Rrybellows, Demons2oo5 and Wing44 with the insertioon of libellous comments. Any attempt to correct the article is instantly reverted. WP:CSD is my argument in this case - if an article can be created on this topic, it is probably better to do it elsewhere as any effort to correct the article is highly likely to be reverted.Gazimoff (talk) 10:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. There are other tools such as blocking and page protection which can be used to deal with vandalism. If we delete an article because of vandalism then the vandals will have won. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:24, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The page was vandalised again by another new user. If possible, it may be worth looking at those blocks and other tools you mentioned, as the situation is getting a bit ridiculous.Gazimoff (talk) 17:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep Per Hobit, sources. This is an established service dedicated to servicing those who plays old games on Apple machines. -- Shark face  217  03:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep We've already been through this, and it passed even before the google news articles. GofG undefinedundefinedundefined  Talk 22:56, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notability is now demonstrated within the article, vandalism is irrelevant.  (jarbarf) (talk) 03:42, 23 March 2008 (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.