Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moxie Media scandal

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 no consensus. WP:NPASR per low participation herein. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:32, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moxie Media scandal

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

This article feels gratuitous, at best. The company wasn't even large enough to have its own page on Wikipedia. I find it odd, that on the political scandals page it is a duck out of water and do not feel as if it adds any value to Wikipedia as a whole. After spending several months as an editor for a few categories, I understand that everyone wants to be fair, but at what point do we allow Wikipedia to be a tattle tale platform for vengeance instead of a source for relevant information that matters. Seeger7 (talk) 22:34, 23 June 2016 (UTC) Creating deletion discussion for Moxie Media scandal[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:38, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:38, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:39, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:06, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:57, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I don't think the nomination gives any reason for deletion consistent with our guidelines for deletions. It looks like a solid article, it has multiple sources, it meets wp:GNG. It doesn't bother me at all that the company "Moxie Media" did not have a Wikipedia page; it could be a tiny operation whose name was given to the scandal which is far more noteworthy than the company.

Perhaps the deletion nominator's concern about the article could be addressed by putting it in context of other political scandals? How big is this relative to other scandals? How is it similar/different vs. other scandals? The deletion nomination mentions "the political scandals page", what is that? In the page's incoming links, I don't see a political scandals list-article. Was it just removed from such a list-article? I see there exists a List of political scandals with subpages for many countries, but for the U.S. it only lists List of federal political scandals in the United States. --do ncr am 02:17, 8 July 2016 (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.