Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of SB Nation websites

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. Courcelles 17:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of SB Nation websites[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:LISTCRUFT; Wikipedia:NOT#DIRECTORY; inappropriate WP:PROMO list consisting only of external links per WP:EL. Proposed deletion contested by creator without comment. Gurt Posh (talk) 14:57, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. —Gurt Posh (talk) 14:57, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment since this was nominated for deletion, the creator removed the enormous list of external links. This has left a "list" of three articles, which are more than adequately linked at SB Nation, Template:SB Nation, and related articles by the creator. This is the latest addition to a WP:Walled garden of articles on the SB Nation brand, created first by one account and then another, both of which have edited nothing but SB Nation promo, renamed articles repeatedly (e.g moving The Verge to The Verge (shopping mall) thereby breaking direct and transcluded links), etc, suggesting a WP:Conflict of interest by the creator(s). Gurt Posh (talk) 09:02, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:02, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this is pretty clearly an attempt at having a place on Wikipedia to dump a potentially enormous number of promotional external links. No thanks. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:47, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:47, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I actually spent a solid year chipping in (unpaid) at a couple SB Nation websites. Sports Blog Nation is the largest network of professional and collegiate sports blogs, the only other network on the landscape to rival them is that of ESPN. This is not a small company, they're pretty huge — I believe that an ex-AOL executive is running the show there. SB Nation is 100% notable in and of itself, that should not be doubted by anyone for even one second. Now, if you follow me here, assuming this is a highly notable organization, which it is, a list of the 300 or whatever constituent blogs SHOULD be also notable, assuming that at least some of these are notable themselves. There probably are several: Athletics Nation is the blog of the guy that started the company and is big, I know there are sources out there for Blazers Edge, which is their NBA bell cow, Celtics Blog is enormous as sports blogs go. There are doubtlessly others. So, to me: probably a worthy list subject. Now, of course, the big question here: was this article a Conflict-of-Interest related, promotionally driven external links farm, tossable on NOT DIRECTORY grounds? It sounds like it was. Carrite (talk) 16:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC) Last edit: Carrite (talk) 16:15, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete without prejudice. Having reviewed the new page by the new editor that was originally tagged for deletion, this did indeed start as a links farm for SBN's regional blogs. However, despite that false start (WP is NOT A LINKS DIRECTORY), this remains a legitimate subject for a list. One would hope that a few more linkable articles on SBN blogs emerge first so that there is some sort of functionality provided. Carrite (talk) 16:24, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete , with prejudice. To the extent that some of the contents is encyclopedic material, it can best go in the main article. The best place for them to list their sites is their own web page. DGG ( talk ) 03:59, 5 September 2011 (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.