Forum:TC:List of fan sites

Forums > Trash compactor archive > TC:List of fan sites

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record.

The result of the debate was No consensus. Default to keep.. Grunny (Talk) 09:10, October 13, 2009 (UTC)


List of fan sites (talk - history - links - logs)

This list had escaped his clone troopers was not included in the Category: Real-world lists and thus managed to escape the Great Jedi Purge Glorious List Purge. I propose to delete this list per our soon-to-be-passed new notability policy. MauserComlink 17:00, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Delete

  1. MauserComlink 17:00, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
  2. Maybe move it to the Star Wars Fan Wiki if they need it. Pranay Sobusk ~ Talk 17:15, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
  3. If that's all they're here for, I want to crush their enthusiasm. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 20:40, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
  4. Per Culator. We don't need users who contribute only because they're allowed to PR their sites here. QuiGonJinn Senate seal(Talk) 21:37, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
  5. A decision to delete here should be taken as including a request to remove the link from any relevant policy pages. —Silly Dan (talk) 20:59, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
  6. I don't understand why this page should magically escape our notability rules. This page, for all intents and purposes, is nothing but a repository of every fan site that would otherwise just get deleted. A list of non-notable fan sites? Does it really make sense to maintain this? Again, more content that belongs on a Star Wars fan project wiki. Toprawa and Ralltiir 22:26, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
  7. Graestan(Talk) 14:29, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
  8. If they fail our notability standards...they're not notable. Go fascism! -- AdmirableAckbar (Talk) 16:11, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

Keep

  1. Strong Keep for three reasons: The new notability policy specifically states at the end that this list is a place for any fan websites that don't meet the criteria, so I don't see where it's subject to notability standards. A category can't accomplish what the list does, since categories can only deal with actual articles, and these sites aren't supposed to have articles. Finally, I feel that having a place on Wookieepedia to dump non-notable fansites may act as a deterrent to help prevent people from these sites from coming in and creating whole articles on their sites, and moving this list to another wiki would detract from that purpose since fewer people are aware of the fan wiki. —Master Jonathan(Jedi Council Chambers) 20:01, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
  2. I think it's worth keeping. Sort of a "You're site can't merit it's own article, but you can put it here and maybe someone will notice". No reason to crush their enthusiasm and turn them off from the site by denying them any chance. -- SFH 20:14, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
  3. Per Jonathan and SFH. JangFett (Talk) 20:46, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
  4. List can't be deleted per said policy, since A) that policy isn't passed yet, and B) it's specifically mentioned as existing BY that policy, so you can't delete it as a result of that policy. Basically, per Master Jonathan and SFH. jSarek 21:18, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
  5. We need a list like this. Nevertheless, we need to cut out all of that junk and spam links (links that were probably only added there to increase Google search ranks). The list is barely useful right now, but it still has potential. Most of those links should be removed, and guidelines concerning which sites may be added to the list should be created. --Michaeldsuarez (Talk) (Deeds) 01:56, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
  6. Meh, one step at a time. Per SFH. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Talk page) 15:42, September 28, 2009 (UTC)
  7. The Doctor K.(No I'm not really a doctor.) 02:43, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
  8. Please don't tell me that Wookieepedia is becoming a fascist/stalinist dictatorship. This is one way to kill our respect and good name in the fan community. This smacks of Orwellianism. Andykatib 07:51, October 1, 2009
  9. Per most of the previous voters, of both sides. --Skippy Farlstendoiro 06:26, October 2, 2009 (UTC)

Comments

If you want to include a new voting option, please consult me first. MauserComlink 17:00, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

So, instead of having articles for junk we don't need, you want to have a list for junk we don't need? MauserComlink 20:45, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

  • Based on your rationale for the deletion, that's probably something that's best brought up in the discussion about adopting the new policy. - Brandon Rhea Alliance Starbird (talk) 01:47, September 28, 2009 (UTC)