Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/The forum site - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

174:- Non-encyclopedic. Barely over the user count minimum, and a poor Alexa rating, spells delete this subsubsubsubstub. The essential problem with pages like is this, there is absolutely nothing to expand because there's nothing encyclopedic to say about the site. There is no suggestion that this site has influenced a wider audience or that it is anything more than a chat page. Beyond the (POV, I will note) "friendly place to chat" - what are you going to say about this site? List all the moderators? All the forums? Who cares! 96:
they assert that they have more than 5000 users (from forum). I can't verify that though (although I have no reason to doubt it). BTW to the forum members reading this. You can comment by clicking on the edit link at the top and typing a message in under mine. Please end your comment with ~~~~, to
259:
The best criterion to employ is whether anyone else, wholly independent of the subject, has found it notable enough that they have gone to the effort of publishing non-trivial works of their own that are about it. For
246:, with many entries that can never be more than "X is a discussion forum. Domain name: D. Number of members claimed: N.", not an encyclopaedia. (This is just the same process that yields a 252:
Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that the forum actually has the number of members stated, any more than Knowledge (XXG) actually has the number of editors that
264:, for example, one will find independently written and published FAQs, guides, papers in conference proceedings, and a large number of books. Searching, I find 211:. If we can cite reliable independant sources that document its friendly community, reputation, and addictiveness then I might change my recomendation. - 320: 219: 17: 273: 337: 36: 229:... not really much point in having articles about web forums unless there's something notable to say about them. 190:
It may fall into the criteria, but it seems to lack worth, and I don't see how this is or can become encyclopedic
318: 217: 336:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
155: 250:, not an encyclopaedia, when inclusion criteria for companies include things like "has N or more employees".) 312:
thing is lack of wider participation in forming this proposed policy. (Hint hint nudge nudge, everyone.) -
322: 303: 284: 233: 221: 199: 182: 165: 109: 90: 52: 104: 85: 313: 212: 58: 253: 49: 151: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
98: 79: 272:. Anything in this article beyond a mere directory entry, of the form described, would be 268:
like that for this subject. Indeed, the web site appears not to even have an "about" page
239: 175: 70: 195: 179: 208: 297: 281: 230: 148: 161: 158: 75: 256:
states. (Consider people who create one-off vandalism accounts, for example.)
191: 67: 147:• Points: 756601 • PMs: 75282 • Friends: 9955 • Reviews: 305 • Polls: 1017 261: 242:
criteria: An inclusion criterion of "has M or more members" yields a
330:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
308:
What's wrong with WP:WEB? Well, ok, lots of things. But the
238:
This highlights one of the things that is wrong with the
119:- I am convinced by their stats list on their main page. 39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 207:per our usual policy with things that cannot meet 340:). No further edits should be made to this page. 295:per various reasons given above. Fails WP:V. -- 8: 74:and its alexa rating is 391,686. Also, see 276:. Knowledge (XXG) is not a directory. 126:22 online 9 new today 526 recent 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 78:on the forum about their article. 24: 129:• Topics: 24798 • Posts: 391109 144:16063 replies 23160 ratings 69:under the 5000 recommended by 1: 123:Forums: 3170 • Members: 5630 44:The result of the debate was 323:01:25, 7 December 2005 (UTC) 304:00:57, 7 December 2005 (UTC) 285:19:18, 5 December 2005 (UTC) 234:16:11, 4 December 2005 (UTC) 222:14:13, 4 December 2005 (UTC) 200:21:16, 3 December 2005 (UTC) 183:19:18, 3 December 2005 (UTC) 166:18:34, 3 December 2005 (UTC) 110:18:20, 3 December 2005 (UTC) 91:14:52, 3 December 2005 (UTC) 53:00:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC) 357: 244:discussion forum directory 333:Please do not modify it. 132:865 today Goal: 2325 32:Please do not modify it. 97:sign your message. 64:Non-notable Forum. 254:Special:Statistics 248:business directory 66:It has 1270 users 274:original research 198: 178:a Web directory. 164: 135:• Journals: 5586 348: 335: 316: 300: 215: 194: 154: 34: 356: 355: 351: 350: 349: 347: 346: 345: 344: 338:deletion review 331: 314: 298: 213: 145: 139: 133: 127: 76:this discussion 62: 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 354: 352: 343: 342: 326: 325: 306: 289: 288: 236: 224: 202: 185: 143: 138:28428 replies 137: 131: 125: 121: 120: 113: 112: 61: 59:The forum site 56: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 353: 341: 339: 334: 328: 327: 324: 321: 319: 317: 311: 307: 305: 302: 301: 294: 291: 290: 287: 286: 283: 279: 275: 271: 267: 263: 257: 255: 249: 245: 241: 237: 235: 232: 228: 225: 223: 220: 218: 216: 210: 206: 203: 201: 197: 193: 189: 186: 184: 181: 177: 173: 170: 169: 168: 167: 163: 160: 157: 153: 150: 142: 141:• Pics: 4266 136: 130: 124: 118: 115: 114: 111: 108: 107: 103: 101: 95: 94: 93: 92: 89: 88: 84: 82: 77: 73: 72: 68: 60: 57: 55: 54: 51: 50:Mailer Diablo 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 332: 329: 309: 296: 292: 277: 269: 265: 258: 251: 247: 243: 226: 204: 187: 171: 146: 140: 134: 128: 122: 116: 105: 99: 86: 80: 65: 63: 45: 43: 31: 28: 188:Weak delete 162:Eventualist 159:Darwikinian 156:Wishy Washy 270:of its own 315:brenneman 214:brenneman 180:FCYTravis 231:*Dan T.* 299:Dalbury 282:Uncle G 266:nothing 149:Zordrac 293:Delete 278:Delete 262:Usenet 240:WP:WEB 227:Delete 205:Delete 176:WP:NOT 172:Delete 152:(talk) 71:WP:WEB 46:delete 102:roken 83:roken 16:< 310:main 209:WP:V 117:Keep 48:. - 192:Ian 280:. 196:13 106:S 100:B 87:S 81:B

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
deletion review
Mailer Diablo
00:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
The forum site

WP:WEB
this discussion
Broken
S
14:52, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Broken
S
18:20, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Zordrac
(talk)
Wishy Washy
Darwikinian
Eventualist
18:34, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
WP:NOT
FCYTravis
19:18, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Ian
13
21:16, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
WP:V
brenneman

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.