Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cellphedia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. – ABCD 19:33, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is not at all notable. Yet. Give it some time, perhaps, but Wikipedia shouldn't be a method of getting the word out about relatively new things. Right? --Jemiller226 06:03, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed. NN, plus Wikipedia is not advertising. Delete. But at least the thing already exists, as opposed to WikiIsNot crystal ball. Marblespire 07:36, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It is notable to the people who are using and benefiting from the service, and to people who want to learn more about it from a neutral source. Stbalbach 15:47, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I created the page and have no relation or interest in the service. It is ongoing, viable service that exists and people are using. If you want to re-word it feel free, I just paraphrased stuff of the net, if it sounds market-speak, feel free to make it sound more neutral. The concerns should have been addressed in the talk page, or by editing the article first, instead of a VfD. Stbalbach 15:42, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: A search for pages containing "cellphedia" but not containing "wikipedia" on Google amounts to a paltry 63 sites (if you allow "wikipedia", then it's still only 106), some of which reside on the same domain. In Cellphedia's current state, it only accepts the first incoming answer, so if it's wrong, you're sunk; therefore, it's not even particularly useful to those few people with access to it at the moment. My nomination stands. --Jemiller226 18:39, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps you could say that in the article, instead of the VfD page, so readers who come to Wikipedia looking for information can learn more about it. BTW Google is a tool. There are 432 hits for "I am broccoli".. is that notable? Stbalbach 20:52, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Non-notable; advertising. --Carnildo 19:48, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- See comment above. I created the page and have no connection with them, how could it be advertising? Sounds, again, like a copy-edit issue. Stbalbach 20:48, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It can be "advertising" if the apparent purpose of the article is to drive up awareness of the product or service. There does not have to be a financial connection in order for something to be considered advertising. Alexa doesn't even have a traffic ranking on this service yet. Since it's also not showing up on google, I am forced to conclude that it's not yet ready for a Wikipedia article. There is not enough verifiable information to create a non-stub article. Delete but without prejudice against re-creation if/when it becomes a notable service. Rossami (talk) 00:33, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, there is no apparent purpose as you say. I thought it was notable, nothing else like it exists, it's an entirely new concept and way to organize technology, community and data. Stbalbach 02:50, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This could be a great article...but in the future. My nomination for deletion has nothing to do with my opinion of the cool factor of the service itself. I just don't think it's an article whose time has come quite yet. --Jemiller226 05:06, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, there is no apparent purpose as you say. I thought it was notable, nothing else like it exists, it's an entirely new concept and way to organize technology, community and data. Stbalbach 02:50, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It can be "advertising" if the apparent purpose of the article is to drive up awareness of the product or service. There does not have to be a financial connection in order for something to be considered advertising. Alexa doesn't even have a traffic ranking on this service yet. Since it's also not showing up on google, I am forced to conclude that it's not yet ready for a Wikipedia article. There is not enough verifiable information to create a non-stub article. Delete but without prejudice against re-creation if/when it becomes a notable service. Rossami (talk) 00:33, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- See comment above. I created the page and have no connection with them, how could it be advertising? Sounds, again, like a copy-edit issue. Stbalbach 20:48, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- keep. Kingturtle 06:21, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Non-notable, advertising. Quale 04:35, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, ad. Radiant_* 09:43, May 10, 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: WiReD article about this and talking about possible link-ups with us. James F. (talk) 11:09, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Wired News, May 12, 2005. As Wikipedia Founder Jimbo Wales completed negotiations with Cellphedia to incorporate the service into the not for profit Wikimedia enterprise, the users of Wikipedia had a vote of their own to delete any mention of Cellphedia. "It's simply not notable and is advertising" one Wikipedian was quoted as saying, who wished to remain anonymous. LOL. Stbalbach 05:41, 12 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.