Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donkpedia

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2009 January 17.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 was delete. OR/No RS/WEB seicer | talk | contribs 02:47, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Donkpedia[edit]

Procedural nomination due to the speedy deletion of this article under A7-web was contested at DRV, where it was determined that the speedy deletion criteria did not apply. See the DRV discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 September 3. I have no opinion on this article or discussion at this time. Jerry delusional ¤ kangaroo 00:28, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:RS, no Google News hits or other reliable sources found. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 00:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete An encyclopedia that covers poker is certainly appealing, just like an "encyclopedia" that avoids articles about naughty body parts, but Donkpedia does not yet seem to have the substantial coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources needed to satisfy the guideline for notability. Edison (talk) 04:07, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as failing WP:WEB at this time. Also looks like a lot of original research and use of primary sources. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 09:55, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, completely unnotable. 2005 (talk) 10:05, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete utterly non-notable and fails WP:WEB by miles. I also dispute that simply claiming to be the biggest of something is not in itself a claim of notability... even if that's true, in this case it's still extremely tiny, less than one-tenth the size of the smallest wiki on meta's list of wikis. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
delete I'm unable to locate any reliable sources about this project. JoshuaZ (talk) 19:53, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:30, 9 September 2008 (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.