Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galaxiki

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. Peacent 02:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Galaxiki

Galaxiki (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Looks very interesting/worthwhile, but maybe too new/not notable enough yet. 303 Ghits for Galaxiki. Nominating for community input. No Vote exolon 11:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Looks like it might even be enough for a featured article; but not enough is known about it yet. But I don't think we should delete it; we should keep it and then update it. Meldshal42 11:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

• Comment Meldshal, please construct an argument based on Wikipedia policies and guidelines, such as notability or verifiability, not personal preference. Thanks. --Dhartung | Talk 12:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. No sources, none likely to exist, and Alexa-ranked beyond 4,000,000. Fails WP:WEB, hard. --Dhartung | Talk 12:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - No sources, Googling gives limited results and nothing independent reliable. Also, obvious conflict of interest. Wickethewok 13:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi everyone, Galaxiki is my own project and I also posted the Wikipedia article. I thought it could be interesting enough to write something about it, as I haven't seen something similar yet on the web (well, that's why I made it :-) Okay, you're right, it's really new, user base is still low and yes, "conflict of interest" is also an argument. If it's incompatible with the guidelines, delete it, no problem with that (of course I'm against a deletion, but I don't think that should be considered to be a "neutral position" )joskirps

Comment. If I were you, I'd save the page, and once the site gains a little more popularity and notability then I'd repost it with the added claim to notability and a 3rd party reference or two. Also, welcome to wikipedia! --Android Mouse 05:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Comment. Thanks a lot, Android Mouse! I saved the article and I'll repost it later when it meets the standards.joskirps

• Delete, interesting concept but unfortunately unsourced and no evidence of notability exists. Good luck to the author with this endeavor, though, and it if takes off in the future and gets some reviews or such, then there's plenty of room for an article about it here at that time. Arkyan • ^(talk) 15:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per everyone else. To me, Galaxiki's concept doesn't even sound very interesting - it just sounds like it's going to be a load of TL;DR science fiction.-h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 17:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete; at least wait in advertising your own project until it gets out of betaware. See WP:AUTO. For future reference Galaxiki is here. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. It was launched less than a week ago and nothing I've found helps assert its notability. --Android Mouse 04:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: Not even launched yet (not yet July). Hu 08:58, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

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.