Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abstract Wikipedia

Add links
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 was keep. (non-admin closure) Mdaniels5757 (talk) 01:43, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Abstract Wikipedia[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Abstract Wikipedia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I do not see it being notable just yet. No doubt it will be in the future (hopefully), but currently, imho "No inherited notability" of WP:WEB applies. It is (or rather will be) created by notable organisation but that does not mean it is automatically notable itself. Most of the sources are not exactly independent. Base (talk) 16:54, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Base (talk) 16:54, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to Wikimedia Foundation. There's just barely enough coverage (like [1] and [2]) to justify a paragraph there, but not nearly enough for a stand-alone article at present. XOR'easter (talk) 17:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I just added additional news coverage from France (an RSP-greenlit source), Vietnam, and Germany (×2), and that's in addition to the Neowin article in English and the article in Czech. I can't say I'm 100% sure that each of those is a RS, but they each appear to be from a news organization, so I'm pretty sure at least two of them are (and anyone who wants to check, feel free — several of them have WP pages in English, and I'd guess some others have a page in their native language). We should be careful not to introduce language bias here — it makes sense that most of the coverage so far is not in English, given that Abstract Wikipedia is being publicized as mostly something to help out non-English Wikipedias.
Regarding merging, WP:MERGEREASON states (emphasis added) If a page is very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic. The page is certainly currently short, but I don't think we could say it's unlikely to be expanded soon (several of the sources I just added were published today). {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:30, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Meets GNG. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:28, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Will be notable after the project has gone online, but not yet now. May return later.--Aschmidt (talk) 23:05, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There's plenty enough at present to demonstrate in-depth reporting by a variety of sources to meet the WP:GNG threshold. Schwede66 18:54, 9 July 2020 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Abstract_Wikipedia&oldid=967570967"