Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magic SEO URL for phpBB


 * 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 delete. Kusma (討論) 11:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Magic SEO URL for phpBB
I have to admit right at the top that I don't really know much about such things, but this has only been out for two months, and the second Google hit I find for it says, "Magic SEO URL for phpBB" is really nothing more than a mod_rewrite solution, similar to those freely available on vBulletin.org - The Ultimate vBulletin Resource!. There are six Google hits for it. User:Zoe|(talk) 23:41, 25 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. You have found "Magic SEO URL for phpBB" is really nothing more than a mod_rewrite solution on the Google, because Magic SEO URL for phpBB is competitive product to vbseo.com (it is for vBulletin and is in Wikipedia). Also, Google have 13,900 results so this product is used quite often. RAY 00:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Please explain how you get your numbers. Did you see the link I supplied?  Only six websites even mention this product.  User:Zoe|(talk) 01:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Tako a look on the page with results on the Google to the right top corner of the screen. RAY 09:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Uhuh. And yet there are only six unique websites with references.  All of those thousands of hits are to the same sites, over and over again.  Note:  User:RAY is the initial editor of the article.  User:Zoe|(talk) 15:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I forgot: Try to search for "Magic SEO URL". There are 172,000 results on the Google. RAY
 * Oh, so it's a search engine optimisation thingy that optimises its own visibility in Google, too. How utterly unamazing. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 11:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Not really. Magic SEO does not use backward text links, but only add small image to the footer of generated page. Most internet software do this with text links, which are better for backward links building... RAY 12:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Advertising.--Sar e kOfVulcan 00:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Author of this product also made free and open source CMS called United-Nuke (see Google for results) so I think this entry is not ads (if yes, than vBSEO in wikipedia is advertisment too). RAY 09:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. If this modification deserves a wikipedia entry then shouldn't phpBB's Attachment modification, the Categories Hierarchy modificiation, etc? Those are among the most frequently downloaded modifications at both phpbb.com and phpbbhacks.com. 194.247.239.180 01:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It is simple: vBSEO is the similar product for different internet forum software and is listed in wikipedia too. RAY 09:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If you see equally nonnotable related thingy in Wikipedia, the correct course of action is not to use it to justify your own actions. Instead you're free to nominate that stuff for deletion, which I just did. Let's discuss this plugin's notability here, and that plugin's notability there. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 11:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Let's see: I read the article, and get hit by Search Engine Optomatisatisativition language (widely known as "sounds cool, just tricky to figure out what it actually means"). Then I try to think like the Apache monkey who tries to do what the SEO consultant says. And as an Apache monkey, I know the holy mantra, "mod_rewrite is like XML: if it doesn't work, use more." And then, I was shown a revelation: Oooo, so this article is about a hack that sits atop Apache that makes phpBB URLs actually look like they should have looked like in the first place. So it's a proggie that maps http://forum.example.com/viewtopic.php?t=12345 to http://forum.example.com/topic/12345 ... Stated that way, this software just doesn't sound notable at all; we don't even have articles for various different rewrite engines of web servers, just a generic article that describes this arcane technical practice, and I believe that's all that's warranted; why should we have an article about a separate product that does something even more arcane? In short summary: Sufficiently advanced mod_rewrite is indistinguishable from Magic. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 11:16, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay... but why is vBSEO listed in wikipedia? Because vBSEO (and Magic SEO too) are not only mod_rewrite rules as you have described. Both products only use mod_rewrite to properly handle nice-url - mod_rewrite does not cover the way how are nice-url generated on the page. RAY 11:23, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Long story short, Vbseo is listed here because someone made an article - we don't get the articles pre-approved or anything, someone just made an article, whee. The reason it was kept so far was that no one asked whether or not the thing should be listed. Now that you've pointed it out, I've listed it on AfD too. We'll discuss vbseo's merits in its own AfD. Thank you for pointing it out. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 11:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your clarification. I now understand why someone want to delete this article. I have only one note: it will be fair to keep both articles (vBSEO and Magic SEO) or delete both. RAY 12:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Then nominate it for deletion. User:Zoe|(talk) 15:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I forgot to say following idea: vBSEO and Magic SEO are not about rewrite rules for mod_rewrite. These products are about a techniques how are native URLs generated in the output of an internet software transfered to nice-keywords-urls - they does not require to make any changes in original internet software. It has nothing to do with mod_rewrite rules. This is the reason why can be listed in Wikipedia. I hope you understand me. RAY 00:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Advert.--Runcorn 21:54, 30 July 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.