Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/21st Century Warfare

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 / do not keep. Punkmorten 22:06, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

21st Century Warfare[edit]

ATTENTION!

If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether an article is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting heads (or socks).

You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing!
Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}.

Article gives no indication of satisfying WP:SOFTWARE Whispering^(talk/c) 17:13, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not verifiable by reliable sources. Highly original research. Wickethewok 17:59, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do Not Delete - Another Legit site thats being picked on by people who have nothing better to do. By challenging legit sites that are providing information you are only making the Wiki site weaker and thus making Wiki not legit in the process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.91.119.118 (talk • contribs)
- It doesn't matter if the site is "legit" or not: what matters is whether it satisfies WP:WEB and WP:V. — Dark Shikari ^talk/_contribs 19:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Note: The above ANON user has been blocked for repeated vandalism/incivility to user and user:talk pages. Wickethewok 06:43, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't know what "legit" means, existence is not notablity. This site has an alexa ranking of 4,490,458! User:Zoe|(talk) 21:32, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete gamecruft. Guy 09:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not Delete. WP:Software is not an official policy. This article has no obligation to fulfill it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.215.32.178 (talk • contribs)

However, WP:V is. Wickethewok 03:05, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not Delete. Perhaps my opinion is biased as I am a member of the tourny but I have yet to see any legitimate argument against the article. It's not just a website, it's a tournament and community. The article tells information about the tourny's history and how it works. 21cwsuper6 04:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC) — Possible single purpose account: 21cwsuper6 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other contributions outside this topic.[reply]
Do not Delete. The website is verifiable. We just haven't made it all nice and easy for you guys to do. There is nothing in the rules I have read that says it has to be easy to verify. Just verifiable.Wendingo 04:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC) — Possible single purpose account: Wendingo (talk • contribs) has made few or no other contributions outside this topic.[reply]

If you read WP:V, you will see that it does more than just say that information should be theoretically verifable. It clearly states: "The burden of evidence lies with the editors who have made an edit or wish an edit to remain. Editors should therefore provide references. If an article topic has no reputable, reliable, third-party sources, Wikipedia should not have an article on that topic." Wickethewok 04:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not Delete. Wikipedia is a source of information and reference. 21CW represents a community in a very large segment of the internet, Online Gaming. It is a not for profit site serving thousands with huge growth potential. Wikipedia can best serve its clients by allowing them to discover these types of communities.carlosrod 05:23, 1 October 2006 (UTC) — Possible single purpose account: carlosrod (talk • contribs) has made few or no other contributions outside this topic.[reply]

Do not delete "Publishing is the activity of putting information into the public arena". This is a quote from the wiki site. At no point in your reasons for deletion are websites excluded as published medias. Please remove the motion for deletion and return the article to its previous stature. Furthermore WP:SOFTWARE is not official policy. Hence, due to the numerous website references to 21CW, and the unreasonable criterion you placed on the article your motion for deletion is false and unjust (27GA)S|Sgt.Maverick 86.130.106.246 14:38, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, or if possibly speedy delete as {{db-web}}, for having no sources as required by WP:WEB, and of course for the sockpuppetry. Sandstein 09:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It seems that most of my votes boil down to the following: find some good sources (other than the actual 21st Century Warfare site) and so far as I'm concerned we can keep the article. Otherwise, it consists of unverifiable, original research. If the article is kept, I think it should be moved to 21st Century Warfare (online game) or something similar to make room for an article on real warfare in the 21st century. Cool3 20:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed on the renaming if kept. Wickethewok 21:29, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

delete at a very high level it doesn't pass the 100-years test. In terms of specfic guidelines, I think others have done an excellent job of covering the territory. However, I could see merging it into a "Battlefield 2 league system" article, since there is some useful content (that needs citation) in regards to the general concept. -Harmil 02:27, 3 October 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.