Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SimCentral

Delete communitycruft. Includes a list of neologisms too, in case anyone's unsure about deleting. Alexa rank is about 187,000. -Splash 01:19, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Splash. I was about to VfD this myself -Harmil 01:23, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this VfD should also include Simcentral.net, a redirect that points to this page. -Harmil 01:24, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as per above. Hamster Sandwich 01:29, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. No reason why not.Numba1xclusive 02:19, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User's 16th edit. Has only edited VfDs. -Splash 02:36, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. looks like a cool site, let's keep it.Stpking 02:29, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No such user. Edit actually by 24.91.45.175 (talk · contribs). Same IP previously blanked this page. -Splash 02:36, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete! Damn the torpedoes! Full speed ahead! --Xaa 03:06, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, cruft. Nandesuka 04:26, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, see no reason why it needs to be deleted. Ssmexican 04:40, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • User's 2nd edit. -Splash 05:07, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Maybe a little disorganized, but not useless. To me, communitycruft would be an article on "Gwynar" (one of the words in the dictionary within the article). The article gives a basic understanding of what the topic is, which could certainly be of use and interest to people who are not hardcore fans. Mistercow 06:15, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Apparently Sock Central! Capitalistroadster 07:01, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lots of socks. I hate for that to be the central reason for an article's deletion, though. Mistercow 07:55, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Nothing notable there but babble! >.< UniReb 07:49, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Non-notable forum. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 09:06, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and rewrite. 90,000 google results is notable enough for me. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 13:35, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, if you go to the end of the results, you'll see that as far as unique results go, there are about 50. That said, how notable is "notable enough"? Last I checked, there was nothing in the Wikipedia deletion policy that said an article's subject matter has to have above x Alexa rank, or more than y Google hits. Some things are obvious cruft: an article about a character from a work of fan fiction for example. In cases like this, where the subject is an internet community, I think that the term is inappropriate. Look at Wikipedia:Fancruft. Is this article of minimal interest to non-fans? I submit that it is not. I also feel that the fact that an article contains a list of neologisms does not necessarily make it deletable. It is pretty clear on the deletion policy page that the policy against neologisms is against the coining of neologisms. The policy is in fact against original research. To say that the inclusion in an article of preexisting neologisms which are heavily associated with the subject is unambiguous grounds for deletion is extremely foolish. In that case, I can go to any article I dislike and add a list of "common" terms, and in minutes, someone will surely VfD it. Somehow, I think not. Mistercow 15:32, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Sock-puppet supported nnanity. FCYTravis 18:47, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, not notable Internetcruft. Is that a word? It should be. Lord Bob 19:03, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, shows brief history on former baseball games. Hardcoremax 02:48, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • User's 5th edit. Splash 02:50, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, only mention of the great High Heat baseball series on Wikipedia. The Mike Sausage reference is prety funny too :) Huhuhenry 04:00, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • User's 17th edit. -Splash 05:45, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - irrelevant outside the subject matter, sockpuppet galore - Skysmith 09:53, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - came across this while looking at the mvp baseball page, looks interesting. Sonic1985 01:31, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that this user added the only SimCentral reference on MVP Baseball 2005. Meaning that Sonic1985 either "came across" SimCentral by way of clairvoyance, or has short term memory loss and "came across" it moments after adding it to the article. I find my defense of this article harder and harder to stand by. Mistercow 12:09, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]