Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Offtopic.com

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. CDC  (talk)  18:50, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Offtopic.com
Doesn't establish notability (or very much of anything else, for that matter). --W(t) 21:43, 2005 May 27 (UTC)


 * delete can it be speedy deleted. 578 (Yes?) 21:48, 27 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, extremely short article with little content and see also links which relevance have not been explained. Looks like speedy material to me, but let's wait for a second opinion. Mgm|(talk) 21:50, May 27, 2005 (UTC)


 * Rubbish - delete speedily if poss' Brookie: Some fluffiness in a hard world! 21:51, 27 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete - I'm pretty sure this page got speedy deleted once before today for having nothing but rubbish... and it seems to have made it's way back. I recall putting the speedy delete tag on it once myself... hmmm... yep... there it is in the history.  It looks like User:SocratesJedi put a speedy on it as well at one point.  SirGeneral 21:56, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Yep, I speedied a vandalised version earlier, but what was in the history was the same as what's up now. I prefer we keep it on VFD for now and not speedy it again, so we can find out if they deserve an article. Mgm|(talk) 22:07, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * I didn't realize when I put on the speedy tag that there was content beyond the vandalism. It appears that this article is at the center of an editing war between a couple of users/anons.  SirGeneral 22:30, 27 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete Seeing as Jake! is working on the article now, I would like to see this article kept. Talrias (t | e | c) 21:59, 27 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Do NOT Delete. Why do you want to delete this article? We have a huge article about something awful, yes even a category. Offtopic is way bigger than something awful. And i forgot: Offtopic.com is the largest off-topic web forum in the world.


 * But the article isn't. I might be pursuaded to keep it, if some on-topic info on the site is provided so it becomes on actual article instead of a substub. Mgm|(talk) 22:10, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

- No reason, no care
 * Speedy delete. Pavel Vozenilek 22:08, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete!!!. Establishes the authority of a redlinked myth and doesn't seem to be actually notable --Neigel von Teighen 22:10, 27 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. The number of random forums on the internet is almost unlimited, and this is significantly less notable than Something Awful. A Man In Black 22:16, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Like I said before, it actually is the largest off-topic forum in the world. If you would give me some time I would expand the article so you'll se that there is way more to say about Offtopic.com. (Unsigned comment by User:24.154.77.212)
 * I suggest then that you create a user name and work on the page in your user space. No one would delete it if it was in your user space. 578 (Yes?) 22:22, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
 * That begs the question: if the forum's purpose is to have discussion without the limitations of a stated topic, isn't it impossible to have off-topic discussions on that forum? Jokes aside, part of the purpose of VfD is to give people time to expand an article to show that it isn't fodder for deletion. As this article won't be deleted before June 3, why not take that time to expand it? A Man In Black 22:44, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is going to be the biggest page on Wikipedia, mark my words. The myth has now been explained also. (Unsigned comment by User:24.154.77.212)
 * How nice, still dont see a reason to keep it. 578 (Yes?) 23:06, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Fantastic, thanks for the input. I'll be sure to file that away in my "Things I Don't Give a Crap About" notebook. (Unsigned comment by User:24.154.77.212)
 * Please don't take my comments as leave to fill the article with nonsense. Encyclopedic contributions are appreciated; nonsense just makes work for other Wikipedians, as it will need to be deleted. A Man In Black 23:14, 27 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. Even with unlimited paper, with don't have enough space for all the forums out there on the Net. Harro5 23:30, May 27, 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep Give it a chance. (Unsigned comment by (User:210.49.48.68)
 * Delete --Chill Pill Bill 00:29, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't see much value here. Xcali 00:42, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, notability not established, forum promo. Megan1967 02:42, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy --MikeJ9919 05:10, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, does not establish anything other than they are breaking their own rules: "This article violates Offtopic's rule of never telling anyone about offtopic.", and yet they are fighting to keep it? Thryduulf 19:38, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep That rule is a made up rule as it states. (unsigned vote by user:207.108.37.242, that IPs third edit, the first two were to the article. Thryduulf 10:21, 29 May 2005 (UTC))
 * Keep it  OT is a huge online community. Many other forums have pages here. Give it a chance. I'm new here so help me out! User: Jake!
 * I'm working on it! please keep it and give me a few pointers along the way Jake! 04:12, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm helping too! whydoyouwanttoknow Aussie crew represent! (unsigned comment by user:210.49.48.68)
 * Comment. What people here do not seem to understand is that, however poor the article may be, offtopic is one of the largest forum communities on the internet. The forums are bigger than Slashdot, Something Awful, Penny Arcade, etc... all of which have substantial articles here. Keep in mind that we are deleting a name here; the article can always be fixed. Phil s 10:06, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Apparently a notable board, but the article is vanity. Cleanup, or - failing that - delete. - Mike Rosoft 14:10, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Vorash 19:11, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Cleanup, or, if not possible, delete--Kristjan Wager 20:56, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless it can be cleaned up and made encyclopedic. I see a qualitative difference between the articles Offtopic.com and Something Awful, for example. --Quuxplusone 23:58, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete board vanity. JamesBurns 11:13, 30 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep --"I see a qualitative difference between the articles Offtopic.com and Something Awful, for example." Well the entire Something Awful article is about the main site, except for a small blurb about the forums. Offtopic doesn't have a main page, and all the content is driven through the forum.  That said, it could be made better.  A quick list with descriptions of all the sub-forums would be good. 98fordtaurus 24.154.77.212


 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.