Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hellboundhackers.org


 * 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 RasputinAXP   c  22:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Hellboundhackers.org
Falls under the "Unremarkable people or groups/Vanity Pages." category. A small community site, imo doesn't warrant an encylopedia article. Moreover the article is poorly written and structured and is lacking context e.g "at the moment there are 104 challenges open to users". ErikWhite 01:44, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. DarthVad e r 01:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak delete OR weak keep with complete rewrite (I know that's a weird vote.) The site's number of registered members (assuming the number is factual, which I will for this argument) qualifies as it as being notable enough for a WP article. However, the page as it stands is quite terrible. It really doesn't assert the site's importance at all. If the site's notability was much better asserted in the article (and if the article was cleaned up a lot, and if much of it was completely scrapped), I'd vote keep. But right now, I have to go with delete. -- Kicking222 02:18, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Website with Alexa rank 177,875. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  03:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - It just passes WP:WEB,  however the subject of the site itself is pretty controversial and the presentation of the article now doesnt really assert things.  Perhaps a rewrite suggestion as per User:Kicking222. --Arnzy  (whats up?)  03:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. WP is not a web directory or review site. Paddles 04:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom. Zaxem 05:54, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak delete, the article makes no claim to notability besides the number of editors, which is not large enough to make it notable by itself, in my opinion. I will reconsider if a rewrite is done. -- Kjkolb 09:46, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable with extremely low Ghits.--Jusjih 14:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems to violate WP:WEB to me. Also violates WP:NOT Aeon 18:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete too minor. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 14:01, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * keep this is the website for it's comunity. It's currently growing at 30 users a day. while it may not be known to people out side of the topic it is very well known in it's circles. However, I don't think it being poorly writen warrents it being deleted but rather re-writen.Wolfmankurd 18:57, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete.--Peta 06:25, 25 May 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.