Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xoxohth


 * 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. Redwolf24 01:33, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Xoxohth
Note: Only votes voiced by registered users with a minimum number of outside edits count. This is done to prevent stuffing.

Current valid tally : 7 Deletes (fvw, h8er, Sasquatch, lotsofissues, DavidH, introvert, & nabla), 2 Keeps (Anne & Exeunt)
 * Please take a look at Vfd/Precedents, in particular it is advised not to put tally boxes on vfd pages. There isn't a specific minimum number of edits to vote, and whether a particular vote is actually counted or not is decided by the closing admin. --Mysidia 08:15, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Not notable, nor a useful article. --fvw *  07:14, July 28, 2005 (UTC)


 * VERY STRONG Delete, CSD, Speedy. This is the Wikipedia, not a commercial, for-profit advertisement service.  Are we not men?  Let's guard our Wiki!  Deeeh 02:48, 2 August 2005 (UTC)


 *  Weak Delete, or at least clean up. If this is relevant then it needs to be improved severely. 66,000 Google hits, but only 44 are displayed since the vast majority are from xoxoth own webpage xoxoth.com. Usrnme h8er 09:04, 28 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep If we're going by Google rankings, then this is just as strong of a keep as Brian Leiter's Philosophical Gourmet Report, aka Leiter Report. Google "Philosophical Gourmet Report" and you get roughly 16,000 hits. Google "Leiter Report" and you get only around 8,000 hits. Google "Xoxohth" and you get 63,000 hits! If any pages are vanity, it's the PSG. Graham Wellington, QC 22:16, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * User, has edits only to Xoxohth and this vfd
 * True, but since 62,960 of these are from their own homepage I stilll dont think this is a very good result. I could design a massively interlinked website that automatically had a million hits on google. Or rather I could write a piece of software that did this for me... Not a single visitor... But a million hits...


 * Delete unless some notability can be shown. Alexa shows that this ranks below the 100,000 mark. We are not an advertising medium. that being said, good luck with your board. Sasquatch&#08242;&#08596;T&#08596;C 08:01, July 29, 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep There's an article for College Confidential, which is a similar site that also sells college admissions consulting services. It seems unfair to tilt the deck in favor of sites with a more profit-oriented focus. Amcfreely 13:02, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * User has edits only to this vfd
 * I've actually made a number of other edits, but not logged in.


 * Keep It's in the process of being cleaned-up substantially. It's an important, useful, popular website, and its revised, added-to article could be a good contribution to Wikipedia. Anne M. Daniels 03:56, 1 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep I'm the principle author of the new xoxohth entry, and I'm also a regular on the message board. While the site is not widely known in the public, it is widely known to law school applicants and law school students (and to a lesser degree, college students) and even some law professors (see Brian Leiter and Eugene Volokh).  Exeunt 04:31, 1 August 2005 (UTC)


 * delete I dislike articles about medium sized websites (the CC article included). Turns into a dictionary of insider culture that only insiders can edit.  lots of issues  | leave me a message 07:10, 1 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep Though further information is lacking on Wikipedia, this board's influence is great among law school admissions committees and applicants. Graham Wellington, QC; Xoxohth regular 02:05, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * (Preceding comment by


 * comment probably not really notable enough in the Web world, but what's especially bad is the NPOV, including a list of posters, who certainly aren't notable or even real ("Sexpert - Garrison Keillor"). DavidH 02:27, August 2, 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete Website vanity, unlikely to ever be encyclopedic or NPOV. DavidH 04:23, August 2, 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete - if it weren't a bad joke already, it is advertisement, POV, and not encyclopedic. - Introvert   talk  07:23, 2 August 2005 (UT


 * Delete Nabla 23:21, 2 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep User:Uma.T
 * (Preceding user's first edit was to Xoxohth and on Aug 1: )

Comments from unsigned/unregistered users


 * Keep. Why are people saying "Wikipedia is not a commercial, for-profit advertisement service."?  This is in no way a commmercial or for-profit website.  The people running the website have no particular interest in getting more people to the site since virtually every law student at a big school is aware of it already.  A ton of far less notable sites have unchallenged wikipedia entries because they deal with computer- or technology-related topics that wikipedia editors are typically more interested in.  I have no affiliation with the site and thus no "vanity" interest - I'm just saying that this site is definitely well-known among a large group of people and is thus undoubtedly encyclopedic.


 * comment If Brian Leiter's Philosophy Gourmet deserves a page, this site surely deserves a page. The list of posters is a quick reference for posters new to the board who have trouble with the way the board works. Unlike other message boards, there are no avatars, no personal pages, no sigs, no images, nothing. It is helpful to have a place to find basic information about the most influential people on the board. As someone who has been using Xoxohth for most of its existence, I recognize many on the list of prolific posters. I would hardly expect this to be the case with new posters. The acronyms section is also indispensable to users who are new to the board. Otherwise, there's a steep learning curve to properly use and understand the board. 208.63.200.3 02:58, 2 August 2005 (UTC) (Graham Wellington, QC [as above])


 * Keep. This website is an extremely valuable source of information for those either going to law school or thinking about going to law school.  This website is starting to be mentioned by scholars (Posner, Leiter) and has been mentioned by the Dean of Admissions at the University of Pennsylvania Law School.  This website is growing and more people will be looking for information on it.


 * Very strong keep. This website is becoming a more and more important source of information to law students and even to admissions committees of law schools.  As a result, people outside of XOXOHTH have begun taking notice of this site.  The Dean of Admissions at the University of Pennsylvania Law School has mentioned XOXO, as have legal scholars such as Brian Leiter.  The relevance of this website is continually growing, and soon each of the 100,000+ prospective law students per year want to learn more about XOXO.
 * (Preceding comment unsigned by


 * Strong keep. This board is well-connected to the law student community and beyond, and its educational purpose fits well with the mission of Wikipedia. Hazelrah; xoxo reader.128.59.88.160 02:29, 2 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Strong strong keep. This is the indispensible board for hard information for law students.  Admissions committees from law schools read it routinely to check out what law students are saying.  Some cleanup is in order however. (preceding unsigned comment by 207.237.33.8 Sasquatch&#08242;&#08596;T&#08596;C 08:01, July 29, 2005 (UTC))


 * '''Get rid of this thing. I can't believe they didn't even mention me as a prolific poster! (Madcat)


 * Strong keep. This is a very well known resource amongst law students, and is interesting for its contributions to the culture and the lexicon of LS admissions.


 * Keep, very helpful.
 * (Unsigned comment by )


 * Keep, probably the best I've ever known.
 * (Unsigned comment by )


 * Keep. Helped me get into a top 3 law school AND filled my working hours with fun, friends and amusement.
 * Unsigned comment by


 * Strong keep. I met my wife on xoxohth!
 * Unsigned comment by


 * Delete - vanity/advert - (can't hardly see for the sock puppets) - T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  17:20, 3 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. How can you say this isn't notable enough when there are entries for sites like CollegeConfidential which have fewer hits, fewer posts, and fewer users?
 * (Preceding unsigned comment by )


 * 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.


 * 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 Speedily deleted as repost. - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] 21:48, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Xoxohth
Non-notable website, unverifiable. -- M @  th  wiz  2020  21:25, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable website. Alexa ranking is just 132,129, and it is a reposted article after an earlier consensus was to delete (which is grounds for speedy deletion). -- Rory 0 96 21:32, 6 February 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.