Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GamerNode

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. W.marsh 13:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GamerNode[edit]

Website/company/forums that appear to fail WP:WEB, WP:CORP, and WP:V. There doesn't seem to be any reliable independent coverage on the subject. Biggest claims to fame seems to be that it has a lot of pages and the staff attends gaming trade events. Delete. Wickethewok 02:45, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

COMMENT: The site has been updated with references, including some that may bear looking at.

Delete - per nom. --wtfunkymonkey 03:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. Xdenizen 05:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - independent media coverage added. --Yeldarb 2 06:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That seems to be a press release, which is not independent at all. Wickethewok 06:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The source, PR Newswire's Brian Anderson, is an independent source, according to the WP guidelines. Since the article was neither written nor circulated by the subject of the article, that seems to fulfill the criteria.--Yeldarb 2 07:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PR Newswire looks to be essentially an ad/PR agency of sorts - basically a company hired to make press releases. Wickethewok 07:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to PR Newswire's own site, "PR Newswire is the world's leading corporate news distribution, targeting and monitoring / measurement measurement service." The article in question was written independently of GamerNode's influence in an earnest attempt to raise the profile of the website. The fact that it was written and circulated by a PR distribution service does not dilute its independence. Additionally, I have added more information to the entry, including distribution info for both a magazine and several websites.

You'd trust a company that publishes press releases to assert it's own notability? I wouldn't. (P.S. PR Newswire is actually a notable company.) MER-C 10:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm saying is that GamerNode didn't publish or write the release. PR Newswire regularly writes and circulates profile stories on businesses it considers noteworthy. The only participation GamerNode had in the creation or dissemination of the profile story by Brian Anderson was accepting the interview request from PR Newswire. PR Newswire simply does not write press releases on the behalf of its clients (which, according to the company directory accessed on 6 November at 11:30 PST, does not include GamerNode.com, GamerNode, Inc. or any of its subsidiaries). While the article certainly appears to be a press release, it is not.--Yeldarb 2 19:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. MER-C 10:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per independent coverage added. --MrBlondeX 14:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Keep-- apbsniper 11:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC) No such user; comment was actually written by 68.209.233.89 (talk · contribs). NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 18:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - reasons stated above. --Varsindarkin 19:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Delete - look, accountless sockpuppets! PR Newswire gives press releases. I used to send them press releases when I worked for Gateway. "PR Newswire is the world leader in the electronic delivery of news releases and company-to-press information directly from companies, institutions and agencies to the media, financial community and consumers." Spare me. WP:WEB failed. WP:RS failed. WP:CORP failed. Nice site thou.Very weak keep - Site asserts at least some kind of notability.--Shrieking Harpy......^Talk^|^Count 22:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per independent coverage added. --xkesterx 22:13, 6 November 2006 (UTC) — Xkersetx (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Note: This debate has been added to the list of CVG deletions. -- moe.RON ^{Let's talk | done} 03:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - on first inspection, it seemed to have passed WP:WEB, but all the references are just brief mentions of the site... sites like IGN mention hundreds of smaller websites in rumor-esque articles. --- RockMFR 04:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Even if the sites mention it in passing, shouldn't having material published each issue in a magazine which is not connected to the site count?--probescusv2 Note: User's first edit. --NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 15:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. Non-notable website that fails the WP:WEB criterias. Numerous sockpuppets don't help the situation either.--TBCΦtalk? 08:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Website's main claim of notability is that it provides hosting for the Black Mesa Source forums. Otherwise, it's just another game news site that fails WP:WEB. This doesn't mean it's a bad site, just that it isn't encyclopedic. --Alan Au 08:27, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:WEB failed. WP:RS failed. WP:CORP failed. I actually don't mind the sock and meatpuppets, since the Admins aren't gonna be fooled for a second and AfDs aren't a hand count. I'm finding it funny to watch mentally hilarious people (retards) thinking they are being all cunning and sneaky by posting 'keep' and not signing their post or using a false name when we can just click 'history' and see who ACTUALLY made the comment. Do the orderlies know these cretins are using the computers unsupervised? The Kinslayer 10:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'd lay off on the personal attacks. That being said, it is useless. Sock/meat-puppetry, especially blatant cases like this, usually end up backfiring by annoying other users and making them vote to delete the article anyway. NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 15:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well, the comment is really aimed at those that have come, said 'keep' and are never coming back, so I doubt there gonna complain! I agree about the puppetry backfiring though, it happened at the AfD for Empires once the meatpuppetry and canvassing started. The Kinslayer 16:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, site does not show any notability per WP:WEB. NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 20:00, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Shrieking Harpy. Garrett^Talk 10:05, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Wikipedia policies state that there is no limit to articles, this is not a paper encyclopedia. Where else is someone suposed to look up information on these guys? If they are small, say so in the article. Get to the truth of their claims, and share that truth with the world. *jb 23:59, 11 November 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.