Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Systemwars.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. Golbez 06:02, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Systemwars.com

 * Non-notable forum with under 900 members. WP:NOT a directory and all that. FCYTravis 05:08, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * The forum in question is quite active and has a steadily growing user base. In addition it is linked to a large and growing gaming website that may soon join the mainsteam. I vote to keep it. 05:22, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)Gateman1997


 * "May" join the mainstream. When it does, give us a call.  Until then, delete.  --Xcali 05:24, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete - I agree, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, you can't base an argument on what something may become. --Sysop073 05:26, 2005 Jun 12 (UTC)


 * Why should that matter to you is my question? It's up and coming, why does it have to "be here" for it to be eligible, they just forbid outright crystal balling, which this isn't. We have a board that has 900 member and 350,000 posts... that's quite a bit. 05:27, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)Gateman1997
 * Comment - Because WP:NOT a Web directory. There are a near-infinite number of Web fora, the vast majority of which have done nothing to become encyclopedic. Secondly, it's your POV that the site is "up and coming" - there are no facts to suggest this. All we can go by is members and Google hits, of which there are 249. Heck, I've got more Google results than that and I'm definitely non-notable. --FCYTravis 05:34, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Well you are definitely entitled to your opinion on what are measures of "up and coming". Google hits have nothing to do with board traffic, second I would rate it by post count... of which it has a large amount. Alot more then comparable boards at for instance Gamespot which appeared worthy of an entry. ... added at 05:39, 2005 Jun 12 by Gateman1997


 * Keep - I believe that this site has as much merit for being on Wikipedia as similar gaming websites like IGN, Gamespot, GameFAQ, etc... do. 05:53, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) Bosrs1
 * Comment: This is the only contribution of this user to WP. -- Hoary 05:58, 2005 Jun 12 (UTC)
 * The article lists "prominent members" including one "Gateman1997". Delete as sock-puppet-supported vanity. -- Hoary 05:58, 2005 Jun 12 (UTC)
 * Comment - Creator has posted on the forum in question, encouraging sockpuppetry - . Quote from Gateman1997: "What's more important is their trying to delete it... We should try and stop those fuckers." --FCYTravis 06:02, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, that's rich. Prepare for sockpuppet invasion. Delete, non-notable forumcruft. A &#1080; D &#1103; 01D  TALK  EMAIL  06:05, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: They seems to be spending more time arguing about who should be mentioned in the article and attacking FCYTravis than anything else. I'm not particularly worried.  If they do somehow manage to get their act together, it'll be an annoyance, nothing more.  I've got a clothes dryer that likes to make socks disappear.  --Xcali 07:56, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Yes, rather amusing, that. I wandered over to make a polite reminder and all hell broke loose. I did enjoy their banter about who should be listed under what in the article. Oh, and they called me an "uber nerd" when the entire point of the forum seems to be to debate which video game console is leeter than the rest. Pretty much says it all about the forum and the article. --FCYTravis 08:06, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete website advertising. JamesBurns 06:04, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete but watching page as I load my guns for sock puppet invasion... Sasquatch&#08242;&#08596;Talk&#08596;Contributions 06:14, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nonnotable. mikka (t) 08:19, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable -CunningLinguist 09:04, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as advertising. Mgm|(talk) 10:17, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Non notable ad. Spotteddogsdotorg 14:19, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete: I don't care if it joins the mainstream or joins the Oprah Book Club: Wikipedia is not a web guide.  Geogre 15:05, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for reasons mentioned. Shiri &mdash; Talk 16:49, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete others said what I think. ConeyCyclone 17:35, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Non notable, ad. carmeld1 02:51, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Just like to point out that this article does not meet the wikipedia definition of "ad" which I will include below: "Advertising. Articles about companies and products are fine if they are written in an objective and unbiased style. Further all article topics must be third-party verifiable, so articles about very small "garage" companies are not likely to be acceptable. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they can serve to identify major corporations associated with a topic (see finishing school for an example). Please note Wikipedia does not endorse any businesses and it does not set up affiliate programs." As you can plainly see this article does not violate that rule.17:39, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)Gateman1997
 * Delete. Non-notable. Quale 21:10, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * 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 .