Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/College Fuck Fest
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. Sango123 (e) 23:16, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:WEB. Deprodded by anon w/o explanation. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 23:28, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Spamvertising. IrishGuy 23:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Vanispamcruftisement - Richardcavell 00:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Per Richard. (great word too!)Kukini 00:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep I believe that this site is significant enough in regards to ranking and google hits to warrant its own article, even if I don't like the particular content.--Andrew c 00:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I really hate to keep an article of this variety, but 1) It's Alexa rank is around 6,550, which is certainly high enough; 2) "College Fuck Fest" gets 421,000 G-hits, so if even a fraction of those relate to the site, that's far more than necessary for passing the Google test; 3) The article is in no way written like an advertisement- hell, it's actually kind of critical of the site, and the stub is generally written quite well. I would give this article a strong keep, but I can't bring myself to vote for a strong keep of a porn-related article. -- Kicking222 00:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps the ad nature of the article may be more apparent if you consider the fact that the first revision was the only contribution of its creator [1]. And what about unique google hits? Only 753, and all but extremely few relate to the actual subject of this article - most are just keywords. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - spam advertisement should be added to WP:CSD BigDT 02:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nn website and advert.--Jersey Devil 03:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong delete garbage.ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 04:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete - you cannot use Google and other tests for notability with these types of sites. --MarsRover 06:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Doesn't need to be included. R.E. Freak 06:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per BlNguyen. kingboyk 11:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep notable porn site. Grue 15:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete spam, sexcruft, and totally ujnnecessary since the article adds precisely nothing to what one would immediately understand from the name. Just zis Guy you know? 20:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Scranchuse 02:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Notable. Popular, probably the most popular of the genre. -Branddobbe 07:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete spam. LjL 20:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. The Google test isn't valid for porn, as keyword-stuffing is common among porn sites. The Alexa rank is higher than the average AFD-bait, but not nearly high enough to slide by on that basis alone. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep They've been in the news. I saw an article that focussed specifically on them and their tactics but couldn't find the original online but here's a reprint [2]. I did also find this [3]. Therefore, they met WP:WEB. Mangojuicetalk 11:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I've now updated the article and sourced it. Mangojuicetalk 11:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Entirely unencyclopedic. An aside: the "Google test" isn't valid for anything. —Encephalon 04:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.