Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Thrillville (theater event)

Thrillville is a cultural icon in the Bay Area. It gathers people from across many cities and states into one place to share in the culture of film, music and cabaret. Writing it off as "just a" shows an extreme lack of understanding in what events like these are. Is Aids Life Cycle "just a" bike ride? Is Wikipedia "just a" website? The answer is no to both. Thrillville is keeping a dying tradition alive. Without Thrillville we just have a theater that plays movies. Do not delete the entry.Cylon78 22:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Addition to the discussion: Other Wikipedia articles. Peaches_Christ on Wikipedia, uncontested by the editors, is no where as well layed out/detailed/backed up as Thrillville, yet as noted, it is uncontested. Based on technical merrit alone it seems the the Wiki editors are choosing to single out our Thrillville for deletion. Next, Peaches Christ and Thrillville do, more or the less, the exact same thing in the same area, yet Wiki feels Peaches is notable enough to keep, but Thrillville is not. Every arguement the Wiki editors have brought to the table can be countered simply by finding articles already listed on Wikipedia that match the "style" of article we are trying to do for Thrillville. Based on this evidence, Wikipedia needs to either allow our Thrillville, or do mass deletions of any article that does not meet the exact standards that our Thrillville is, unjustly, being held to.Cylon78 19:55, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Not a ballot template
I'm for all editors participating in discussion. However, one editor today, I noticed had only one edit: this AfD. I have flagged their comment with, and I have added to the top of the discussion.

As a reminder to all participating, it is the merits of the discussion that is really key here, not a "show of hands." —C.Fred (talk) 21:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I'm missing something here but doesn't free speach come into play? If you don't like it don't look at it, listen to it, go to it. BUT don't lay that BS on me. I like the discussion but is this serious? UGH. RV


 * I'm not trying to inhibit anybody's speech. I'm just pointing out that the admin who closes the debate may very well use their right to not listen. —C.Fred (talk) 19:24, 2 June 2007 (UTC)