This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Internet. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
watch |
See also: computer-related deletions.
Fails WP: N. All of the sources that are currently on the page are either primary or don't provide in-depth coverage. I found a 2005 book that gives a short example of how to use Nevow and a few others that mention it in passing, but this isn't enough to establish notability. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 01:53, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:CREATIVE and the sources appear to be mostly self-published, not reliable, or passing mentions Jayjg (talk) 18:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
The nomination for deletion is inaccurate. The appropriate category is WP:ENT, not Creative. Subject meets inclusion standards by a comfortable margin. He has appeared in a notable amount of high profile video games and shows and has working relationships with a notable amount of prominent people within his industry. He also co-owns an animation studio which has been involved with many major projects. He has received an award relevant to his industry that is only given to one person per year. He is a longtime member on a well-established and influential youtube channel.
Many of the acting credits are verified through the IMDB citation, which Wikipedia lists as an acceptable source. His roles are also verified through other databases, as well as specific citations on particular roles, which is why there are citations of passing mentions of him with regard to specific roles.
The article should be kept as the subject qualifies under WP:ENT and the overall sourcing is acceptable; if there are issues with individual sources that could be handled in Talk or through the removal or addition of sources instead of a page deletion. KEP95 ( talk) 04:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP ANYBIO, GNG BoraVoro ( talk) 12:55, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBIO. The majority of sources are primary or don't provide significant coverage. There is only one source that contributes to notability. — GMH Melbourne ( talk) 14:26, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• *Delete. A lot of primary sources; many are self-published - fails WP:BIO. Includes partisan commentary – fails WP:NPOV. Consider adding mention to 1998 Australian waterfront dispute depending on sources. Spinifex&Sand ( talk) 23:18, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
None of the references pass the WP:SIRS test, so fails WP:GNG. This should not have been moved out of draftspace. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
A search returned only primary sources; I could not find any evidence that he meets GNG. JSFarman ( talk) 15:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Sources are trivial (included in a list of other youtubers) and non-independent. One significant coverage is about his investigation by the police. No other significant independent secondary source covering his popularity as a content creator. - AlbeitPK ( talk) 01:51, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:GNG. All references are just passing mentions, not enough in-depth coverage for an article. Clear friend a 💬 21:22, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
References
Oliver Anthony / RadioWV [from photo caption]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting discussion as there is no consensus. By now, I've closed thousands of AFDs and while article creators sometimes self-identify, I don't think it is mandatrory or a COI. If anyone who created or edited an article has a COI then so does the editor seeking its deletion. And don't accuse another editor of being "snarky" when you yourself or making irrelevant accusations. Anyone is free to participate in an AFD except sockpuppets and a few editors with editing restrictions so let's focus on arguments and not personalities.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 21:41, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
"Instagram Face" is something very abstract and unverifiable, ie. two reliable sources may define it differently. It may also be inherently derogatory, as it is based on negative opinions about women's appearances. With Love from Cassie Schebel ( talk) 01:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
No significant coverage. Non-notable web software. SL93 ( talk) 19:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Only coverage is press releases/funding announcements. No secondary coverage. Probable COI. BrigadierG ( talk) 21:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
I appreciate the paid disclosure from the creator of this article, but I don't see this meeting NCORP and it should have gone through AfC. Similar appears to be have been deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piwik PRO, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piwik PRO (2nd nomination). Disregarding that, none of the sources are sufficient to pass NCORP, many are press releases or primary sources related to the company. There's a bunch of statistic sites (e.g. [6]), which in counts as trivial coverage under "inclusion in collections that have indiscriminate inclusion criteria". Other trivial coverage under ncorp includes raising capital ( [7]). Many supposed third-party sources are written or possibly written by the company and thus primary ( [8] is written by their PR manager, [9] is written by a "guest writer", and covers a merger which is also trivial coverage). BEFORE search only turns up more of the same. Pahunkat ( talk) 10:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Clear promotional content, and there is no significant coverage in any media that I could find, unless we are counting the "Telecom Industry News", which doesn't seem all that reliable to me. Kingsmasher678 ( talk) 03:02, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
I can't find any significant coverage for this organization, and the only mentions I can find just note that they maintained the Abusive Hosts Blocking List. Either a redirect or delete would be a good outcome. Helpful Raccoon ( talk) 06:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Obscure P2P application with no significant coverage. Helpful Raccoon ( talk) 21:33, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Per WP:SINGLEEVENT. The remaining sources are news articles. Skepsiz ( talk) 18:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Obscure
Bulletin board system, which was/is based in the
Bay Area from what I can tell. I couldn't find any SIGCOV. Redirecting to
Diversi-Dial would be a reasonable outcome.
Helpful Raccoon (
talk) 04:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
This subject is far from notable by Wikipedia’s standards. There is a major lack of significant coverage addressing the subject directly, and the ones that do mention the subject fall short of being reliable sources. Majority of the sources listed are the subjects own YouTube channel or to instagram posts, see WP:NOSOCIAL. The subject falls incredibly short of the standards that are in place by Wikipedia to establish notability, as being married to someone famous does not make someone notable. 4theloveofallthings ( talk) 01:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:31, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Not at all at G4, but the issues raised at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Project against Hate and Extremism of the citation of reports vs. WP:ORG level coverage remain true. Bringing it back here for discussion. Star Mississippi 20:00, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability. Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization. Such coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements. I do not believe that the coverage of this organization rises to the level required by the relevant notability guideline, and I believe that Alsee analyzed the matter very thoroughly in 2022. Cullen328 ( talk) 22:52, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
"The organization has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the organization."I find that having their work featured in full pieces from outlets in Portugal, Brazil, the US, the UK and other places should be enough to cover both of those points. Mind you that none of the three articles I mentioned were published during the previous discussion: they're from jun/23, jan/24 and apr/24. Rkieferbaum ( talk) 00:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Doczilla
Ohhhhhh, no! 04:15, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
I didn't find significant coverage in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Zella Day. toweli ( talk) 06:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
There was an AfD on this previously that determined to keep this article on the basis that AfD is not a place to resolve sourcing concerns. I think there are sourcing concerns with respect to notablity, which is a valid reason to bring an AfD. I can't find any reliable article that actually makes comparisons between different AMP stacks. The two sources in the article are about individual stacks, and don't make any comparisons between different stacks. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 23:40, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
as much as i love yuno, the only reliable source that talks about him is this, which makes him not notable Authenyo ( talk) 00:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
https://www.sportskeeda.com/us/music/news-who-yuno-miles-fans-react-youtuber-releases-hilarious-drake-diss-response-metro-boomin-s-challenge | WP:RSP: user-generated | ✘ No | ||
https://www.rapreviews.com/2023/11/yuno-miles-yuno-i-cant-rap/ | ✔ Yes | |||
https://www.sescoops.com/wwe/rapper-yuno-miles-releases-wwe-diss-track-im-beefing-with-the-wwe | Probably, website has multiple writers and this one has a degree | ✔ Yes | ||
https://pitchfork.com/features/article/the-age-of-shitpost-modernism/ | One example with only one mention | ✘ No | ||
https://gizmodo.com/saga-bbl-drizzy-drake-kendrick-lamar-metro-boomin-1851470820 | Only one mention as "The Meme Diss Track"; in the article's slides. | ✘ No | ||
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
... per Wikipedia policy regarding self-published sources, these reviews should never be used as third-party sources about living people.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think this discussion needs more time so I'm relisting it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I can't believe I have to say this but Wikipedia doesn't care that you personally think this article subject is notable. Our subjective judgments are irrelevant to AFD decisions. The question is, are there sufficient reliable sources to establish notability? Are the sources located by
User:pythoncoder and any other editors adequate to demonstrate GNG? That's the important question here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
"He is notable in my opinion; while I am not a fan of his music he does have almost 1 million followers on spotify and has been drawn even further into the public eye by his Drake diss."Notability is not ones opinion. If that, then, my father is notable in my mind. The second was
I don't think that this page should be entirely erased. It has a good structure, some notability, and there's other pages that should probably be deleted. I vote no for this page deletion. Also why did that OJSimpsonLover fella get blocked??? It says for vandalism but he was just giving his opinion.Here, we don't believe in WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST. If the editor thinks the other articles like that merits deletion, so be it, nominate it or leave it. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 03:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep Yuno Miles' music is unique. Also his song was trending on YouTube and hit music charts. Also he will hit 1m subs soon.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Freedun ( talk • contribs)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
http://www.onestowatch.com/en/blog/meet-yuno-miles-the-internets-favorite-rapper | Was about the rapper | Ones to watch is a music blog and by the virtue of looking at the written content, it made me feel to notify people of a notable blog it is. Another example Bella Naija. | Blog, equally advertorial. | ✘ No |
https://www.theneedledrop.com/interviews/2023/11/a-conversation-with-yuno-miles | An interview should always be independent as the person interviewed always say about him; those which aren't verifiable at most times. | Per WP:THENEEDLEDROP. | Its an interview per WP:INTERVIEW or related. | ✘ No |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrJWNQSIoNE | Clip of played music. The full show should have contained other stuffs. | The show is reliable and notable as well. | In the context, the music was played within any discussion of it's nature, etc. I could have taken it as a review but no! | ✘ No |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 04:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
The subject of the article doesn't appear to be notable. The article cites two sources, the first being Everything2 (a user-generated website, thus not reliable), and the second being an article on adobe.com. Other than that, I found a short Entertainment Weekly article from 1999, a Boston Globe article (also 1999), and a Boston Phoenix article (2009) with around 30 words about Computer Stew. Perhaps it could be merged to another John Hargrave project, Zug (website) (although I don't know if Zug itself is notable, but it did exist for significantly longer) or ZDNET. toweli ( talk) 10:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
SourcesKeeping in mind that all articles must conform with the policy on verifiability to reliable sources, and that non-independent and self-published sources alone are not sufficient to establish notability; web-specific content may be notable based on meeting one of the following criteria:
- The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. This criterion includes reliable published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, magazine articles, books, television documentaries, websites, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations except for media re-prints of press releases and advertising for the content or site or trivial coverage, such as a brief summary of the nature of the content or the publication of Internet addresses and site, newspaper articles that simply report the times at which such content is updated or made available, or the content descriptions in directories or online stores.
This is a 142-word review. I consider it to be significant coverage. The review notes: "So it’s a delight to discover this regurgitatively innovative daily show, in which John Hargrave (an editor at computer-trade site ZDNet) and Jay Stevens (contributing solely via speakerphone) present a feast of gag-inducing gags. ... Despite some audio glitches and a bulky download, Stew shows that a lot of fun can be had with a little technology — and a strong stomach."
This is a 784-word review. I consider it to be significant coverage. The review notes: "The show comes in byte-size servings of about three minutes per segment. Short videos are appearing on the Internet, as entrepreneurs and Hollywood types are falling over one another trying to discover what kind of entertainment content is going to make a killing on line. And like it or not, there's nothing else quite like "Computer Stew" out there."
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk) 16:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎ 05:25, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
I found technical papers using the term "cooperative web" in a few different ways (e.g. as an extension to the semantic web), but this article refers to one or more attempts to create a collaborative real-time editor, particularly IBM's Blue Spruce project and its obscure successor OpenCoWeb. It might be possible to create an article about Blue Spruce, but this article's title and content are not appropriate for such an article. There's also the older, wiki-inspired collaborative service CoWeb, which stands for "Collaborative website", but this service is unrelated to IBM's project. Helpful Raccoon ( talk) 20:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:12, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Supermium is essentially just Chromium backported to Windows XP. Is this really notable enough for its own article? Seems like it could just have a short mention in the Chromium page. Bringing up the phrase "Supermium" on Google news just reports two articles related to the program, and two related to a Spotify subscription tier. There are several videos made on it however on YouTube (though, mostly by small creators). HolyNetworkAdapter ( talk) 01:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Supporting old versions of Windows is a large enough niche, and the article already has 2 external refs because of it. (Plus there are plenty of other browser articles for even smaller, less-relevant niches.) - Pmffl ( talk) 17:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 01:58, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Being a fork or knock-off does not disqualify.-- 2601:444:7F:53A0:A1BD:97C3:2A74:18FC ( talk) 00:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please provide policy-based opinions on what should happen to this article, this is not an article talk page to discuss the article or list features.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NJOURNALIST and generally WP:GNG. Sources are either announcing him as new editor-in-chief of Legit.ng, passing mentions or dependent on the subject. Being Reuters-trained, or working with other Nigerian media outlets, etc, isn't a credible claim of notability. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 20:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Comments | Source |
---|---|
Interview, fails WP:IS | 1. "Award-winning Journalist, Rahaman Abiola Shares Tips for Creating Quality Stories -". primusmediacity.com. 18 April 2022. Retrieved 2024-04-03. |
Routine mill news, fails WP:IS fails WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth | 2. ^ Obi, Daniel (2024-03-20). "INMA appoints Legit.ng's Editor-in-Chief Rahaman Abiola into its Africa Advisory Council Board". Businessday NG. Retrieved 2024-03-27. |
Routine mill news, fails WP:IS fails WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth | 3. ^ Jump up to:a b Ola (2023-04-24). "Legit.ng gets new Editor-in-Chief, Head of Desk". I-79 Media Consults. Retrieved 2024-03-28. |
Nothing about subject, fails WP:SIGCOV | 4. ^ Toromade, Samson (2023-06-14). "Nigeria Health Watch lands over 250 solutions journalism stories in 2 years". Pulse Nigeria. Retrieved 2024-03-28. |
Routine mill news, fails WP:IS fails WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth | 5. ^ Mix, Pulse (2024-03-20). "INMA appoints Legit.ng's Editor-in-Chief Abiola to Africa Advisory Council". Pulse Nigeria. Retrieved 2024-04-03. |
Routine mill news, fails WP:IS fails WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth | 6. ^ Tosin, Alamu (2023-04-12). "Legit.ng Appoints New Editor-in-Chief, Head of Desk and Others". NGNews247. Retrieved 2024-05-09. |
Routine mill news, fails WP:IS fails WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth | 7. ^ INMA appoints Legit.ng's Rahaman Abiola into its Africa Advisory Council Board. |
Name mentioned in list, nothing meets WP:SIGCOV addressing the subjeect directly and indepth | 8. ^ "INMA: Africa Advisory Committee". www.inma.org. Retrieved 2024-05-09. |
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is an unbolded Keep here and also if it gets deleted as a Soft Deletion, I have a feeling it will automatically be restored. Let's get some more opinions here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Doczilla
Ohhhhhh, no! 06:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Internet. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
watch |
See also: computer-related deletions.
Fails WP: N. All of the sources that are currently on the page are either primary or don't provide in-depth coverage. I found a 2005 book that gives a short example of how to use Nevow and a few others that mention it in passing, but this isn't enough to establish notability. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 01:53, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Does not meet WP:CREATIVE and the sources appear to be mostly self-published, not reliable, or passing mentions Jayjg (talk) 18:58, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
The nomination for deletion is inaccurate. The appropriate category is WP:ENT, not Creative. Subject meets inclusion standards by a comfortable margin. He has appeared in a notable amount of high profile video games and shows and has working relationships with a notable amount of prominent people within his industry. He also co-owns an animation studio which has been involved with many major projects. He has received an award relevant to his industry that is only given to one person per year. He is a longtime member on a well-established and influential youtube channel.
Many of the acting credits are verified through the IMDB citation, which Wikipedia lists as an acceptable source. His roles are also verified through other databases, as well as specific citations on particular roles, which is why there are citations of passing mentions of him with regard to specific roles.
The article should be kept as the subject qualifies under WP:ENT and the overall sourcing is acceptable; if there are issues with individual sources that could be handled in Talk or through the removal or addition of sources instead of a page deletion. KEP95 ( talk) 04:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP ANYBIO, GNG BoraVoro ( talk) 12:55, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NBIO. The majority of sources are primary or don't provide significant coverage. There is only one source that contributes to notability. — GMH Melbourne ( talk) 14:26, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
• *Delete. A lot of primary sources; many are self-published - fails WP:BIO. Includes partisan commentary – fails WP:NPOV. Consider adding mention to 1998 Australian waterfront dispute depending on sources. Spinifex&Sand ( talk) 23:18, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
None of the references pass the WP:SIRS test, so fails WP:GNG. This should not have been moved out of draftspace. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
A search returned only primary sources; I could not find any evidence that he meets GNG. JSFarman ( talk) 15:20, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Sources are trivial (included in a list of other youtubers) and non-independent. One significant coverage is about his investigation by the police. No other significant independent secondary source covering his popularity as a content creator. - AlbeitPK ( talk) 01:51, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Doesn't meet WP:GNG. All references are just passing mentions, not enough in-depth coverage for an article. Clear friend a 💬 21:22, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
References
Oliver Anthony / RadioWV [from photo caption]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting discussion as there is no consensus. By now, I've closed thousands of AFDs and while article creators sometimes self-identify, I don't think it is mandatrory or a COI. If anyone who created or edited an article has a COI then so does the editor seeking its deletion. And don't accuse another editor of being "snarky" when you yourself or making irrelevant accusations. Anyone is free to participate in an AFD except sockpuppets and a few editors with editing restrictions so let's focus on arguments and not personalities.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 21:41, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
"Instagram Face" is something very abstract and unverifiable, ie. two reliable sources may define it differently. It may also be inherently derogatory, as it is based on negative opinions about women's appearances. With Love from Cassie Schebel ( talk) 01:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
No significant coverage. Non-notable web software. SL93 ( talk) 19:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Only coverage is press releases/funding announcements. No secondary coverage. Probable COI. BrigadierG ( talk) 21:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
I appreciate the paid disclosure from the creator of this article, but I don't see this meeting NCORP and it should have gone through AfC. Similar appears to be have been deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piwik PRO, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piwik PRO (2nd nomination). Disregarding that, none of the sources are sufficient to pass NCORP, many are press releases or primary sources related to the company. There's a bunch of statistic sites (e.g. [6]), which in counts as trivial coverage under "inclusion in collections that have indiscriminate inclusion criteria". Other trivial coverage under ncorp includes raising capital ( [7]). Many supposed third-party sources are written or possibly written by the company and thus primary ( [8] is written by their PR manager, [9] is written by a "guest writer", and covers a merger which is also trivial coverage). BEFORE search only turns up more of the same. Pahunkat ( talk) 10:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Clear promotional content, and there is no significant coverage in any media that I could find, unless we are counting the "Telecom Industry News", which doesn't seem all that reliable to me. Kingsmasher678 ( talk) 03:02, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
I can't find any significant coverage for this organization, and the only mentions I can find just note that they maintained the Abusive Hosts Blocking List. Either a redirect or delete would be a good outcome. Helpful Raccoon ( talk) 06:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Obscure P2P application with no significant coverage. Helpful Raccoon ( talk) 21:33, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Per WP:SINGLEEVENT. The remaining sources are news articles. Skepsiz ( talk) 18:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Obscure
Bulletin board system, which was/is based in the
Bay Area from what I can tell. I couldn't find any SIGCOV. Redirecting to
Diversi-Dial would be a reasonable outcome.
Helpful Raccoon (
talk) 04:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
This subject is far from notable by Wikipedia’s standards. There is a major lack of significant coverage addressing the subject directly, and the ones that do mention the subject fall short of being reliable sources. Majority of the sources listed are the subjects own YouTube channel or to instagram posts, see WP:NOSOCIAL. The subject falls incredibly short of the standards that are in place by Wikipedia to establish notability, as being married to someone famous does not make someone notable. 4theloveofallthings ( talk) 01:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:31, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Not at all at G4, but the issues raised at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Project against Hate and Extremism of the citation of reports vs. WP:ORG level coverage remain true. Bringing it back here for discussion. Star Mississippi 20:00, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject is not sufficient to establish notability. Deep or significant coverage provides an overview, description, commentary, survey, study, discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the product, company, or organization. Such coverage provides an organization with a level of attention that extends well beyond brief mentions and routine announcements. I do not believe that the coverage of this organization rises to the level required by the relevant notability guideline, and I believe that Alsee analyzed the matter very thoroughly in 2022. Cullen328 ( talk) 22:52, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
"The organization has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the organization."I find that having their work featured in full pieces from outlets in Portugal, Brazil, the US, the UK and other places should be enough to cover both of those points. Mind you that none of the three articles I mentioned were published during the previous discussion: they're from jun/23, jan/24 and apr/24. Rkieferbaum ( talk) 00:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Doczilla
Ohhhhhh, no! 04:15, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
I didn't find significant coverage in reliable sources. A possible alternative to deletion is a redirect to Zella Day. toweli ( talk) 06:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 07:28, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
There was an AfD on this previously that determined to keep this article on the basis that AfD is not a place to resolve sourcing concerns. I think there are sourcing concerns with respect to notablity, which is a valid reason to bring an AfD. I can't find any reliable article that actually makes comparisons between different AMP stacks. The two sources in the article are about individual stacks, and don't make any comparisons between different stacks. HyperAccelerated ( talk) 23:40, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:47, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit 00:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
as much as i love yuno, the only reliable source that talks about him is this, which makes him not notable Authenyo ( talk) 00:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
https://www.sportskeeda.com/us/music/news-who-yuno-miles-fans-react-youtuber-releases-hilarious-drake-diss-response-metro-boomin-s-challenge | WP:RSP: user-generated | ✘ No | ||
https://www.rapreviews.com/2023/11/yuno-miles-yuno-i-cant-rap/ | ✔ Yes | |||
https://www.sescoops.com/wwe/rapper-yuno-miles-releases-wwe-diss-track-im-beefing-with-the-wwe | Probably, website has multiple writers and this one has a degree | ✔ Yes | ||
https://pitchfork.com/features/article/the-age-of-shitpost-modernism/ | One example with only one mention | ✘ No | ||
https://gizmodo.com/saga-bbl-drizzy-drake-kendrick-lamar-metro-boomin-1851470820 | Only one mention as "The Meme Diss Track"; in the article's slides. | ✘ No | ||
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
... per Wikipedia policy regarding self-published sources, these reviews should never be used as third-party sources about living people.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I think this discussion needs more time so I'm relisting it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 00:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I can't believe I have to say this but Wikipedia doesn't care that you personally think this article subject is notable. Our subjective judgments are irrelevant to AFD decisions. The question is, are there sufficient reliable sources to establish notability? Are the sources located by
User:pythoncoder and any other editors adequate to demonstrate GNG? That's the important question here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
"He is notable in my opinion; while I am not a fan of his music he does have almost 1 million followers on spotify and has been drawn even further into the public eye by his Drake diss."Notability is not ones opinion. If that, then, my father is notable in my mind. The second was
I don't think that this page should be entirely erased. It has a good structure, some notability, and there's other pages that should probably be deleted. I vote no for this page deletion. Also why did that OJSimpsonLover fella get blocked??? It says for vandalism but he was just giving his opinion.Here, we don't believe in WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST. If the editor thinks the other articles like that merits deletion, so be it, nominate it or leave it. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 03:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep Yuno Miles' music is unique. Also his song was trending on YouTube and hit music charts. Also he will hit 1m subs soon.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Freedun ( talk • contribs)
Source assessment table:
| ||||
Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
---|---|---|---|---|
http://www.onestowatch.com/en/blog/meet-yuno-miles-the-internets-favorite-rapper | Was about the rapper | Ones to watch is a music blog and by the virtue of looking at the written content, it made me feel to notify people of a notable blog it is. Another example Bella Naija. | Blog, equally advertorial. | ✘ No |
https://www.theneedledrop.com/interviews/2023/11/a-conversation-with-yuno-miles | An interview should always be independent as the person interviewed always say about him; those which aren't verifiable at most times. | Per WP:THENEEDLEDROP. | Its an interview per WP:INTERVIEW or related. | ✘ No |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrJWNQSIoNE | Clip of played music. The full show should have contained other stuffs. | The show is reliable and notable as well. | In the context, the music was played within any discussion of it's nature, etc. I could have taken it as a review but no! | ✘ No |
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{ source assess table}}. |
Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 04:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
The subject of the article doesn't appear to be notable. The article cites two sources, the first being Everything2 (a user-generated website, thus not reliable), and the second being an article on adobe.com. Other than that, I found a short Entertainment Weekly article from 1999, a Boston Globe article (also 1999), and a Boston Phoenix article (2009) with around 30 words about Computer Stew. Perhaps it could be merged to another John Hargrave project, Zug (website) (although I don't know if Zug itself is notable, but it did exist for significantly longer) or ZDNET. toweli ( talk) 10:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
SourcesKeeping in mind that all articles must conform with the policy on verifiability to reliable sources, and that non-independent and self-published sources alone are not sufficient to establish notability; web-specific content may be notable based on meeting one of the following criteria:
- The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. This criterion includes reliable published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, magazine articles, books, television documentaries, websites, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations except for media re-prints of press releases and advertising for the content or site or trivial coverage, such as a brief summary of the nature of the content or the publication of Internet addresses and site, newspaper articles that simply report the times at which such content is updated or made available, or the content descriptions in directories or online stores.
This is a 142-word review. I consider it to be significant coverage. The review notes: "So it’s a delight to discover this regurgitatively innovative daily show, in which John Hargrave (an editor at computer-trade site ZDNet) and Jay Stevens (contributing solely via speakerphone) present a feast of gag-inducing gags. ... Despite some audio glitches and a bulky download, Stew shows that a lot of fun can be had with a little technology — and a strong stomach."
This is a 784-word review. I consider it to be significant coverage. The review notes: "The show comes in byte-size servings of about three minutes per segment. Short videos are appearing on the Internet, as entrepreneurs and Hollywood types are falling over one another trying to discover what kind of entertainment content is going to make a killing on line. And like it or not, there's nothing else quite like "Computer Stew" out there."
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Extraordinary Writ (
talk) 16:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Owen×
☎ 05:25, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
I found technical papers using the term "cooperative web" in a few different ways (e.g. as an extension to the semantic web), but this article refers to one or more attempts to create a collaborative real-time editor, particularly IBM's Blue Spruce project and its obscure successor OpenCoWeb. It might be possible to create an article about Blue Spruce, but this article's title and content are not appropriate for such an article. There's also the older, wiki-inspired collaborative service CoWeb, which stands for "Collaborative website", but this service is unrelated to IBM's project. Helpful Raccoon ( talk) 20:15, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 22:12, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Supermium is essentially just Chromium backported to Windows XP. Is this really notable enough for its own article? Seems like it could just have a short mention in the Chromium page. Bringing up the phrase "Supermium" on Google news just reports two articles related to the program, and two related to a Spotify subscription tier. There are several videos made on it however on YouTube (though, mostly by small creators). HolyNetworkAdapter ( talk) 01:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Supporting old versions of Windows is a large enough niche, and the article already has 2 external refs because of it. (Plus there are plenty of other browser articles for even smaller, less-relevant niches.) - Pmffl ( talk) 17:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 01:58, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep. Being a fork or knock-off does not disqualify.-- 2601:444:7F:53A0:A1BD:97C3:2A74:18FC ( talk) 00:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please provide policy-based opinions on what should happen to this article, this is not an article talk page to discuss the article or list features.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 02:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Fails WP:NJOURNALIST and generally WP:GNG. Sources are either announcing him as new editor-in-chief of Legit.ng, passing mentions or dependent on the subject. Being Reuters-trained, or working with other Nigerian media outlets, etc, isn't a credible claim of notability. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 20:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Comments | Source |
---|---|
Interview, fails WP:IS | 1. "Award-winning Journalist, Rahaman Abiola Shares Tips for Creating Quality Stories -". primusmediacity.com. 18 April 2022. Retrieved 2024-04-03. |
Routine mill news, fails WP:IS fails WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth | 2. ^ Obi, Daniel (2024-03-20). "INMA appoints Legit.ng's Editor-in-Chief Rahaman Abiola into its Africa Advisory Council Board". Businessday NG. Retrieved 2024-03-27. |
Routine mill news, fails WP:IS fails WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth | 3. ^ Jump up to:a b Ola (2023-04-24). "Legit.ng gets new Editor-in-Chief, Head of Desk". I-79 Media Consults. Retrieved 2024-03-28. |
Nothing about subject, fails WP:SIGCOV | 4. ^ Toromade, Samson (2023-06-14). "Nigeria Health Watch lands over 250 solutions journalism stories in 2 years". Pulse Nigeria. Retrieved 2024-03-28. |
Routine mill news, fails WP:IS fails WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth | 5. ^ Mix, Pulse (2024-03-20). "INMA appoints Legit.ng's Editor-in-Chief Abiola to Africa Advisory Council". Pulse Nigeria. Retrieved 2024-04-03. |
Routine mill news, fails WP:IS fails WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth | 6. ^ Tosin, Alamu (2023-04-12). "Legit.ng Appoints New Editor-in-Chief, Head of Desk and Others". NGNews247. Retrieved 2024-05-09. |
Routine mill news, fails WP:IS fails WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth | 7. ^ INMA appoints Legit.ng's Rahaman Abiola into its Africa Advisory Council Board. |
Name mentioned in list, nothing meets WP:SIGCOV addressing the subjeect directly and indepth | 8. ^ "INMA: Africa Advisory Committee". www.inma.org. Retrieved 2024-05-09. |
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is an unbolded Keep here and also if it gets deleted as a Soft Deletion, I have a feeling it will automatically be restored. Let's get some more opinions here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Liz
Read!
Talk! 19:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Doczilla
Ohhhhhh, no! 06:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)