Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Progressive Boink


 * 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. Some of the delete votes are by sock puppets, but even ignoring them, there's a consensus to delete here. &mdash; J I P  | Talk 18:03, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Progressive Boink
This afd nomination was incomplete. Listing now. &mdash;Crypticbot (operator) 14:00, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete If this page stays, we might as well have a page for every website on the internet filled with private in-jokes, insults directed at others and pretentious 'hilarious' fake webpages. Have you any idea how many that would be? This site offers nothing that you can't find anywhere else.Mammal Nitrate
 * Delete I can put the word "lesbian" on a website and get thousands of hits via Google too. AMAZING! XavierVE
 * Delete I have to agree with Haeleth. The fact that the site is clearly using this entry as a way to get themselves off seals this one as a DELETE. CSendak
 * Delete Aside from the way the entry is advertising the site, the write-up itself stinks. It pretty much outlines the pointlessness of the submission with its total lack of content. Unlike the X-E/Seanbaby entries, it just SOUNDS like someone blowing their own horn.
 * Delete, Alexa ranking 74,327, 22 rated sites linking in.  Sounds pretty non-notable to me.  Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 14:25, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. PB gets over 16k google hits for "progressive boink," has recievied tens of thousands of page hits for many of their articles (like the "rating the lesbians" series), and features like The Dugout have recieved a decent cult following.  Plus, it's a spinoff/replacement for Whatever-dude.com, an X-Entertainment-style e/n site that I believe was fairly popular back in the day.  Article still needs significant cleanup ('ve already tried to do a little, but I've been away for a few days and will continue), and I'm fairly certain that authors of the website created this article, but it is a notable website that should be kept. Also, original nominee, on article's talk page, nominated for the following: "I am recommending this for deletion, it's a pretty sad excuse for an article."  Worth noting. --badlydrawnjeff 17:23, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: I searched for link:progressiveboink.com and got 185 hits. That seems low for something as widespread as is claimed. link:progressiveboink.com -wikipedia gets exactly one hit, as does link: -site:. What am I doing wrong here? - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 13:18, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Interesting, I suppose. I admit to being possibly the worst googler in existence, I've never heard of that.  For the sake of discussion, "link:x-entertainment.com" gets 275, dropping to a whopping 9 when "-wikipedia" is added.  It's apparent I'm the vocal minority here, but I'm honestly surprised at the amount of opposition on this one.  Perhaps I just know a lot of people who read it, or simply remember it better when it was whatever-dude.  --badlydrawnjeff 14:47, 16 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. On the one hand it doesn't seem to meet WP:WEB; on the other hand I've actually heard of this site, unlike many that do meet WP:WEB. On the third and ultimately decisive hand, however, they've got a link to "Progressive Boink's official Wikipedia entry (Humor us while we talk about ourselves, please.)" on their front page, and that earns them a big black mark for vanity. &mdash; Haeleth Talk 18:34, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Not to play the "but but" game, but notable sites like X-Entertainment do not meet WP:WEB either, and that proposal should keep that in mind. And yes, the site does appear to have written itself, and I've already done some cleanup to rectify the apparent advertising, and hopefully we can vote with what's in the article in mind. --badlydrawnjeff 18:43, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Reyk 19:40, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. WP is not a webdir, this entry adds nothing which is not basically site advertising. KillerChihuahua 20:07, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep I've seen worse articles and things far less notable on Wikipedia. Sure, the article may have been started by staffers of the site the article examines, but it is not as if they are vainly watching over it hawk-like in Pro-Boi propoganda manner. It is a rather popular website, notable enough for Wikipedia, and has no reason to be deleted. Cleaned up, maybe, but a delete would be just plain malicious. 71.131.66.179 05:22, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * s/mailicious/puzzling to fans/ - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 13:20, 16 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete as per Just zis Guy et al. MCB 21:02, 17 November 2005 (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.