Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teamlorio.net


 * 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 was
 * The result of this debate was delete &mdash; Nearly Headless Nick  {L} 13:16, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Teamlorio.net
ANNOUNCEMENT: It should be noted that AlQoraton was NOT the creator of this article, as has been suggested below, rather towards Jamino (me) should be directed any discrepancies in regards to posting regulations. It has been put forward that AlQoraton asked members to post their views on this debate via the TeamLorio.net web-forums. However, as he didn't write this article, it should be understood that rules and regulations regarding the posting of Articles on Wikipedia are unclear to him as, obviously, he has previously had no reason to have read them. However, as I seriously doubt the members of the TeamLorio.net forums will be deterred from defending this article merely by the notice posted above, I must also stress as the sModerator of the Forums in question that NOBODY from TeamLorio.net simply makes an account to tip the scales of this debate. This achieves nothing. This message has also been posted on the Forum itself.--Jamino 17:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Deprodded, no where near WP:CORP/WP:WEB. Vanity wouldn't suprise me. Andeh 14:33, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Alexa.com - Traffic Rank for teamlorio.net: 4,778,194
 * According to Google, only links to the website.
 * Website forum has 86 registered members
 * Delete Per WP:CORP quite clearly Vanity. --Charlesknight 14:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. PJM 14:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep All company-references removed and article meets WP:WEB. AlQoraton 16:51, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Could you explain to me which part of WP:WEB it matches with? Just so there is no confusion. (for disclosure purposes it should be pointed out that Alqoraton is the creator of the article) --Charlesknight 17:04, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Criteria 2 and 3 of WP:WEB. (for disclosure purposes it should be pointed out that I am NOT the creator of the article, merely an insider and frequent editor.) --AlQoraton 17:19, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * According to your user page you are part of Teamlorio.net. Also, what notable awards has the website won? I couldn't find the word award anywhere in the article.-- Andeh 17:23, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * My apologies Alqoraton, braindeath on my part.
 * following Andy's question - I do not see how it matches criteria 3 of WP:WEB which is basically about non-trival distribution/broadcast. What is the source of this non-trivial distribution? --Charlesknight 17:27, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * All teamlorio.net animations are posted on/distributed by Newgrounds. Several have been on the frontpage and won Portal awards. --AlQoraton 17:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Well at first glance, that would suggest it actually fails WP:WEB which states that Content that is distributed by independent online sites will almost certainly satisfy the first criterion. However, this criterion ensures that our coverage of such content will be complete regardless. For example, Ricky Gervais had a podcast distributed by The Guardian. Such distributions should be nontrivial. Although GeoCities and Newgrounds are exceedingly well known, hosting content on them is trivial. --Charlesknight 17:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Good point, but then why are Joseph Blanchette's, David Firth's or other well known Newgrounds author's pages not up for deletion? I don't see why teamlorio.net, as a Flash production team, couldn't have a Wiki-page if they can. --AlQoraton 18:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You are always welcome to list them for deletion if you believe they should be deleted according to the deletion policy.-- Andeh 18:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I know that, but it doesn't answer my question. Just look around people, there are more well-known Newgrounds authors on Wikipedia. Why is teamlorio.net different? --AlQoraton 19:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * it's not, but Wikipedia has over a million articles there are ALWAYS articles here that should not be. The fact that those are here and maybe should not be, just means that nobody has gone around to AFDing them. However now you have raised their profile to the community, I'm sure that if they are not notable they will be AFD'd shortly (which is generally the result of someone saying "hey what about article X!"). I'll be checking them out myself when I get a moment later.--Charlesknight 19:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 * WP:BIO and WP:WEB are very different things, you are referring to people, this article is on a website.-- Andeh 19:58, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * This article ISN'T about a website, it's about TWO people (not ONE, like the other examples) making Flash cartoons. So you're saying separate pages for TheGreyPilgrim and Mithrandir with the same content would be OK? --AlQoraton 20:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 * So if it isn't about a website or company, then it must meet WP:BIO. Which it doesn't appear to meet at all.-- Andeh 20:43, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Flash artists are also professionals who get a great deal of public interest, just like musicians, actors, authors, painters, etc. WP:BIO also clearly states "This is not intended to be an exclusionary list; just because someone doesn't fall into one of these categories doesn't mean an article on the person should automatically be deleted.". And just for the record: I'm not trying to get other Flash artist's pages deleted. I'm trying to understand why the examples I gave have been here for over a year or even longer (without anyone noticing they, apparently, don't meet Wikipedia policy) and this page gets flagged withing two months. To all so-called "patrollers": I advise you to start looking for some SERIOUS breaches in Wikipedia policy and stop coming up with a new policy every time to make your story plausible. And I also invite you to first suggest an alteration of the article, not immediate deletion. --AlQoraton 21:21, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 * and I would suggest that you read WP:CIVIL (To all so-called "patrollers": I advise you to start looking for some SERIOUS breaches in Wikipedia policy and stop coming up with a new policy every time to make your story plausible). Ranting at fellow editors does not help your case. --Charlesknight 21:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for making my point. --AlQoraton 21:32, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 *  AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, -- Andeh 10:39, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. It meets WP:WEB so lets keep it.  I agree that simply hosting your webpage on Newsgrounds is not signifigant but thate fact that it has been on the front page and given awards suggests that it is in fact notable.  Evidence of those things should be presented though. AmitDeshwar 01:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment - if WP:WEB says a site is trivial, why does it matter where on that site something appears? --Charlesknight 09:07, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Vanity? Where?  Is the Salad Fingers Wiki also up for deletion due to vanity?  How about the World of Warcraft Wiki?  The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air Wiki?  Any Wiki describing another product of entertainment?  No.  This Wiki simply disects another product of entertainment, one known as Team Lorio.  At NO point during the Wiki does it claim that Team Lorio is the best, or better than anyone else, nor does it even claim to be GOOD beyond what results have provided proven facts to subtantiate.  Also, if you're going to post in this debate then at LEAST provide a comment that supports what you're saying, rather than just insulting something that need not be insulted.  Wiki-Management, I challenge you to find any form of vanity in this article.  If it exists, which it does not, I will remove it.  I wrote this article, and great care was taken to ensure all guidelines were met.  Therefore is there ARE any breaches then this article should be flagged for ALTERATION, not deletion.  That is absurd. Jamino 15:02, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not up for deletion because some users may believe it is vanity, it is up for deletion because there is no evidence that the site or ex-company is notable enough per Wikipedia's notability standards (WP:WEB).-- Andeh 16:10, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete This fails WP:WEB in every conceivable way. It has not won any well-known awards. It hasn't been distributed via a site that is independent of the creators (submitting it to Newgrounds makes it difficult to claim independence as it wouldn't be in there without Team Lorio putting it on there and the notes make it clear that Newgrounds hosting is considered trivial). It hasn't been a subject of multiple non-trivial published works. IrishGuy talk 19:14, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete clearly fails to assert notability (see WP:WEB) and is something of a vanity page as well  hoopydink  Conas tá tú? 21:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

AlQoraton (Team Lorio's Mithrandir) comment's on the website linked to in the article say it all but there doesn't seem to be a plausible reason to keep a page about teamlorio.net on Wikipedia. --Charlesknight 13:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I tried to stay as objective as possible by not referring to teamlorio.net as us or using Mithrandir as a nickname. Don't make me start and don't twist my words! I was referring to your (as in all the people who posted Delete) opinion on the matter. And what's with the damn "ATTENTION" sign? Don't make it look like teamlorio.net is forcing people to come here. They can make up their own mind. --AlQoraton 15:54, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * First of all: the Attention sign is what we post whenever it appears that someone outside of Wikipedia is attempting to sway the vote. In that case, we remind them that what counts is the strength of your arguments, not the number of bodies you can muster. Wikipedia, after all, is not a democracy. Second, you're getting too worked up over this; please review what we have to say about civility on Wikipedia before you post next. Captainktainer * Talk 04:29, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I know what the sign is ment for, I can read. But in that case: why does the sign specifically say If you came here because you were told so at the teamlorio.net forums? This is just an insult to teamlorio.net's integrity. They are not telling anybody to come here, so to keep this discussion as fair/clean as possible I would strongly suggest to remove that particular reference. And second, I already reminded Charlesknight to stop posting a new policy every time to make your story plausible. I've read WP:CIVL...so allow me quote myself: Thank you for making my point. --AlQoraton 11:13, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * An insult to your integrity? hum... so how does They are not telling anybody to come here match with And if you want to help, make a Wikipedia account and post a Keep message on that discussion page.. There is no problem with doing that - however getting on your high horse and claiming to do A when you are actually doing B - well that DOES demonstrate you have no integrity.
 * Informing people on what they could do is something different then telling people to come here and post a message. Like I said before: they can make up their own mind. --AlQoraton 18:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The notice is there as the forum message was encouraging fans/members to come here and vote keep, that is a simple notice to deter any users to do that and instead participate in the discussion. Interesting enough, recently.. "The board administrator requires all members to log in".-- Andeh 17:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * That is the result of an options reset via a version upgrade. Also, that does not in anyway restrict you from checking what is posted on the forums.  All you must do is simply create an account.  In light of the previous comment in regards to AlQoraton's integrity - Obviously the members of the forums are going to want the article to be kept.  They wouldn't be members otherwise. Jamino 17:31, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, for the following reasons, all of which are grounded on Wikipedia policy:
 * No reliable sources external to the site or Newgrounds.com are available within the article.
 * No external reliable sources testifying to the notability of the website are available. Generally, I don't believe notability in its own right is a reason to delete. In this case, teamlorio.net has not obtained sufficient press coverage to allow us to write about it from a neutral point of view. Because there is not enough external criticism or analysis to allow us to write about it with that key policy in mind, the article should not be on Wikipedia.
 * Substantial quantities of the information within the article are unverified, even if we were to accept the official site as a reliable source. Captainktainer * Talk 04:29, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Having a tiny fan club does not meet WP:WEB Vic sinclair 09:19, 28 September 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.