Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suckage 2


 * 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. Resistance is futile! Mailer Diablo 00:49, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Suckage
This forum has 25 registered users and no Alexa ranking. The article has been deleted before, but for being a dicdef. Punkmorten 09:18, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The fact that it is not ranked and only has a certain number of users is completely moot, because that particular suckage site went up a few days ago. Other sucks forums have had hundreds of users. Disko 00:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


 * KEEP Hey, my friend told me to come here and post keep. Is this the right place? -Friendvoter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Disko (talk • contribs)


 * KEEP Criteria? What kind of fukking goofy fukks run that pisshole. It's a worldwide encyclopedia and there are members from all over the globe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.197.45.171 (talk • contribs)

Suckage context and source: Conversations with friends, since spring 2003. "I'm going to be up half the night working on this project? It's going to be major suckage," apparent meaning: Suckage takes it's meaning from the extremely common slang word "suck" (v), meaning "to be terrible, horrible, etc." and turns it into a noun, so that everything that "sucks" can now be deemed "suckage". It is to be used in the most informal setting. type of word formation: Another example of affixation: suck + age (n-forming). dictionary entry: suckage, n. Anything that is terrible, unpleasant. [suck + -age] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.197.45.171 (talk • contribs)
 * KEEP Suckage.


 * KEEP This is the problem with the United States. Everyone preaches Free Speech, but if they don't like something they want it deleted. That is not Freedom of Speech, that's censorship. I have never scene a more hypocritical country in the world.

An encyclopedia has entries for all kinds of subjects, even the ones that don't interest you in person. The suckage is a strange community that reaches religious proportions... it is more a culture with ti's own ideals that just an online community. People often don't know or understand what the Suckage is. This article tells these people what they want to know. If you think this article should go because you find it uninteresting, then go ahead and delete a whole bunch of other shitty articles. FREE SPEECH! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zoink, King Spammer (talk • contribs) (first edit ever)
 * KEEP !!

ALSO.. WHAT GOOD ARE ALEXA RATINGS ??? THEY MEAN JACK !!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phreakwars (talk • contribs) (second edit ever) As a moderator of other BBS's I have seen the "SUCKAGE" in action, Not many people realize the groups origins were founded by Dan Parisi, this is important because it covers many aspects of Dan's biography.. a couple of other of Dan's claims to fame can be found as being the owner of the controversial domains whitehouse.com and madonna.com, the later in which, he was sewed by Madonna the singer for. I can point out MANY different sites on Wikpedia that reference another web site... but how many of them have an actual history ?? Maybe if you let the suckage "GANG" tell the tale of the suckage, you will see the relevance of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phreakwars (talk • contribs) (first edit ever) The term Suckage should stay.
 * KEEP
 * Speedy Delete Recreation of deleted material fits the critera for a speedy delete. Added Speedy Delete: Repost template to article. Furthermore, User:Disko was responsible for most of the stuff added to the page.--Jersey Devil 09:47, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, it is completely different to the last previously deleted content and I have removed notice accordingly. I recommend deletion due to not meeting WP:WEB. Capitalistroadster 09:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete does not meet WP:WEB.--MONGO 13:24, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete per above. Nacon kantari   e |t||c|m 17:02, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Changed to strong delete per this Nacon kantari   e |t||c|m 04:08, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as notable as any other internet community, and as relevant as other articles, see Rainbow Monkeys — Preceding unsigned comment added by Disko (talk • contribs)
 * Strong Delete: per above. --Hetar 18:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * KEEP Free speech is a fundamental right of every human being and should not be censored, the 'suckage' is as valid as anything. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.109.171.112 (talk &bull; contribs).
 * KEEP There are articles on every other virtual communities here, so why are we playing pick-and-chose with what goes and what stays? I mean, there are articles on Goatse for crying out loud.
 * If you read the article, you'd see they mention that the SucksNET version of the forum only opened recently. I was familiar with Sucks500, and at its peak that forum had hundreds of active members and was one of the more popular free speech forums on the web.
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.24.19.165 (talk • contribs)


 * KEEP Free speech is a fundamental right of every human being and should not be censored, the suckage is as valid as anything.
 * This is the problem with the United States. Everyone preaches Free Speech, but if they don't like something they want it deleted. That is not Freedom of Speech, that's censorship. I have never scene a more hypocritical country in the world.
 * The term Suckage should stay.
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hüd (talk • contribs)


 *  Speedy delete as per Jersey Devil Capitalistroadster. --Karnesky 21:39, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above, nn website. Comments from its few members don't change that. Fan1967 23:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete per above. --TheMidnighters 23:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. This has nothing to do with censorship. Deltabeignet 01:26, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete With apologies to forum people, your web content is non-notable. Free speech doesn't mean a guaranteed audience on any web site of your choosing. — Adrian~enwiki (talk) 01:27, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. This is an international encyclopedia, and has nothing to do with the state of free speech in America or anywhere else. Grandmasterka 01:55, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This isn't a forum for free speech, it's an encyclopedia, one with standards for inclusion that this article doesn't meet. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:09, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. A non-notable web forum that does not meet WP:WEB.&#160;—  The KMan  talk  06:34, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable per WP:WEB.  Oh yeah, Wikipedia is not a democracy.  It's free, but not lawless. -- Kinu  t /c  06:42, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong speedy delete as per Jersey Devil. – Doug Bell talk&bull;contrib 18:45, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Changed to strong speedy delete per Naconkantari above. – Doug Bell talk&bull;contrib 08:18, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Yes, freedom of speech is a wonderful thing. I can freely say, accordingly, that Suckage is not notable and fails the WP:WEB criteria. —C.Fred (talk) 01:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep- it's not about American free speech it;'s worldwide. Members from Europe, Australia, Canada, etc. R.O. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.105.121.234 (talk &bull; contribs).
 * Speedy delete as blatant self-promoting vanity advertisement per CSD A7 (non-notable group of people). We don't care about some trolling forum that's less than one tenth as notable as the GNAA. All of these meatpuppets simply makes me want to delete this even more. Tagged. -- SYCTHOS talk 03:36, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. James 03:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per meat-socky-pocky and unproven notability. The real problem with United States is that everyone has freedom of speech, but a) nobody has the time to listen to everything that gets said in the whole country all the time, b) nobody wants to write down everything they hear or read, and c) naughty people who inhabit the country demand, for some reason we foreigners (let alone the natives) can't comprehent, $$money$$ for computer hardware and Internet connectivity, both of which are needed to host Wikipedia, and a) and b) and c) considered together leads to the inevitable conclusion that Wikipedia must only include things that actually do matter, and not non-notable cruft like this. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 00:11, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:WEB, flood of socks. Stifle 11:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per Jersey Devil.--み使い Mitsukai 13:59, 2 March 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.