Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rsvpair
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the debate was delete. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 00:21, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable link spam, the only links on google are free web directories they've submitted themselves to, not ranked on alexa, found spamming other articles such as Template:US-airport Ghewgill 16:18, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom, NN, not even close to meeting WP:Web. Looks like more link spam elsewhere Special:Contributions/71.225.51.24, Special:Contributions/70.50.249.190, Special:Contributions/Rsvpair, [1], and probably more. Be advised that it looks like they're reverting your link spam reverts. Dbchip 16:26, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete not notable. The agressive reversions of the link removals also seems to confirm the hostile intent of their spamming. Bovineone 16:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Understood - our only notability (in our minds at least) comes from the fact that we are a large directory - the only free source anywhere to find where air charter planes live in the world. If this does not make us notable, then we can agree - rsvpair does not warrant a page in wikipedia -- yet. If alexa is the judging criteria then we lose. But we don't want to be labelled as spammers for placing our informative links next to other's informative links - we have unique content we wish to share and would like to know how to do this in a fashion consistent with the wikipedia aviation specific content. We had hoped this would be the first tentative steps in a long relationship where we share our data freely with the wikipedia community - building stubs for the missing airports in the directory, we are having meetings tonight to start bulking up the aircraft type pages so there is more information about what each plane is best suited for,etc. How should we proceed? Airwebster 17:44, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Since you operate the directory, your motives may be somewhat suspect, and therefore a gentle approach rather than a bold approach, at least when adding links to it or matter concerning it, is probably in order. When you add such a link or material, and it's removed, talk about the changes instead on the talk page of the article or template, rather than reverting the revert. Demi T/C 21:43, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Aggressive linking, reverting, and template modification despite many warnings followed by an impassioned repentence just as it becomes clear they will be deleted is borderline sociopathic and shows a complete lack of respect for Wikipedians and their community. Their only goal is to do whatever necessary to keep their links. A change in tactics after being exposed only further highlights this. Non-notability and similarity to made-for-AdSense previously established. --Lucent 20:43, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm sorry but I don't think this is an accurate read at all. I see little communication with either user directing them or redirecting them; I think this is probably a useful web directory to link to for some articles and arguing on the basis of someone's supposed "sociopathy" is probably unhelpful. Instead, let's inform new users to discuss disputed changes on the affected talk pages (presumably Template talk:US-airport and Talk:Air charter. Demi T/C 21:40, 18 January 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.