Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shacknews

Is this website encyclopaedia-worthy? It's not the sort of site I would frequent, so I'm not sure. - Lee (talk)  22:13, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * I was suspicious, but shacknews gets over 300,000 hits. Niteowlneils 22:23, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit biased (having contributed to it a few times already), but it does have over 1000 users visiting the site at any given time, has already been involved in a few internet infamys (specifically the LOTR: Two Towers petition) and is one of the most highly respected gaming sites out there, if not the most highly respected. --Gregb 22:27, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Alexa traffic rank of 13,063. Seems to be notable enough, although the article is more about their message board software than the site itself. -- Cyrius|&#9998 22:54, Apr 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * If SomethingAwful and Slashdot get their own entries, so should Shacknews. I'm not a wikipedia user, so I've got no lovely tag line. -- 23:06, Apr 12, 2004
 * It depends on whther or not you think that other sites, such as SomethingAwful or Slashdot, deserve encyclopedia entries. Each has its unique merits and traits.  None of them are really important in any sense; I don't think I would buy a paper encyclopedia with "Something Awful" and "Shacknews" entries.  But these might be appropriate for an online encyclopedia.
 * I'm biased too, since I started the page, but I would like to agree that this is not the sort of thing that belongs in a paper encyclopedia. However, I have often used Wikipedia for unbiased information about internet trends.  Once something becomes popular on the internet, it can become very difficult to find meaningful information about the phrase itself without ridicule.  Google certainly does no help.  Therefore I think that articles about such sites as SomethingAwful and Shacknews, which are often at the heart of such trends, are informative and necessary for an online encyclopedia. Lydgate 23:22, Apr 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll buy that it's significant. But the article as it stands still reads more like advice for someone wanting to join than an encyclopaedia article. There's no mention of the site's significance in the article (what was the Two Towers petition about? Is it worth mentioning?). - Lee  (talk)  23:50, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * It's the "slashdot of games" page. The comments section is 90% of the website, much like slashdot. Shacknews does twice-daily "chatty" posts where people can discuss whatever they'd like.
 * I've updated the entry with more information about the site and did my best to wikify it. I think you'll find it more fitting now Lee. Celerityfm 03:44, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Change it to an article style or nuke it. The current page is just a fanboy rant.
 * If goatse gets an entry, then the Shack deserves one, nuff said!
 * Oh, go on then, I know when I'm beat. I withdraw my nomination.  My apologies to the many fine members of Shacknews. - Lee  (talk)  10:32, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - original vfd poster withdrew nomination. Celerityfm 14:16, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)