Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OUR.life Reborn

An advertisement for a non-notable forum with about a dozen active members. Livajo 20:52, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * It's a forum that gets aproximatly 300-500 hits per day and has been active for over 6 months thus is notable. It really depends what you consider notable. (Posted by 80.5.160.5)


 * Delete. There are many hundreds of forums that are more notable and they don't have separate articles. Xezbeth 20:58, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Against - Yes but that simply means no-one has bothered to make an artical about those forums. Someone made a page for Nilhism but there are more recognisable cult groups. (Posted by 80.5.160.5)
 * First of all, nihilism is a well-known philosophy concerning truth and human existence, not a cult. Well known cults, like Heaven's Gate, have been included in the Wikipedia. Secondly, Wikipedia is not a link repository that needs to link to forums of all types, it is an encyclopedia, and should thus contain only things with at least some notoriety, so only those online communities with a reasonably large impact on the Internet community as a whole are included, like Something Awful and Slashdot. Livajo 21:11, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think that the argument that the article should be deleted just because there are more notable sites without articles is flawed. However, I think that there are a million sites larger / more notable than this one. Hopefully, one day, Wikipedia will have articles on them all, but at this point this is just an ad. The content is not interesting to someone not involved in the forum politics, so it is not encyclopedic. It fails to describe the purpose of the board (it seems to be "general purpose"). Further more, it is POV and rather poorly written. Some of these points are redeemable, so I'll give it the benefit of the doubt for the vfd week. (Sorry about the long-winding message). &mdash; David Remahl 21:19, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * In that case how big would a foum have to be to be classed as a forum of notoriety. For example would www.stupid-boy.com be consided one (as its been running for 4 years and is considerably bigger than OUR.life Reborn) as a comparison so I know for future reference. (Posted by 80.5.160.5)
 * Please sign your edits... Type four tilde signs. ~ &mdash; David Remahl 21:22, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * I cannot sign the edits I have made ... I am not a Wikipedia User. (Posted by 80.5.160.5)
 * You can still sign edits; it'll sign your IP. -- Grunt (talk) 21:51, 2004 Aug 25 (UTC)
 * Comment: Since this anonymous user has failed to identify themselves, I have added IP identifications to their posts here. Kevyn 22:24, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Basically, there needs to be something interesting to say about the forum. There should be something special about it, that would not be immediately obvious to someone just visiting the site. Think about how an encyclopedia is used. Either you have a concept, and go to the encyclopedia to look up more about it. You already know _what_ it is, but you want to find out non-obvious things about it from an unbiased source. The other way to use a 'pedia is to just browse through it. In Wikipedia, links is the main vehicle for this. Since OUR.life is not very notable, there are few other articles that could link to it. Thus, no-one "just browsing" would stumble upon it. My 2¢. &mdash; David Remahl 21:58, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * No, I don't think it would. Forums for very general interests are more likely to survive than those for specific interests. Even then, the forum would have to be externally known to a reasonable degree, ie. known of *outside* its membership. Vote for delete. Lacrimosus 21:54, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. A forum with the given level of activity is not difficult to create. and is not per-se notable.--Ianb 21:51, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. non-notable. Dunc_Harris|&#9786; 21:55, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Wikipedia is not a web guide. Geogre 22:57, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable. A multipurpose web forum like any other.   &mdash; Gwalla | Talk 23:24, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. If the article is considerably cleaned up it would be salvageable if it were about something somewhat notable, but it doesn't appear to be... Fire Star 23:34, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, far from sufficiently notable. &mdash;Stormie 05:02, Aug 26, 2004 (UTC)