Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cougartown

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 of the debate was DELETE. -Splashtalk 23:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cougartown[edit]

Appears to be non-notable website. Doesn't seem to meet WP:WEB. Previously {{prod}}ed by me. Delete. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 00:00, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The school might be notable in itself, but not its unofficial webforum. --Kinu t/c 00:05, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Alexa rank of 800,168. Delete as per nom.  (aeropagitica)  00:08, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Aaron 00:14, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and Alexa rank. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 00:21, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per above. Doesn't seem to be notable enough or important enough for inclusion into Wikipedia. Does not meet WP:WEB. — TheKMantalk 01:14, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Kinu --Ruby 01:50, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete --James 01:51, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Website is valuable resource for history of Hawthorne, California, especially of items related to surf culture, car culture, and 60's pop culture vis-a-vis notable musical HHS alums, the Beach Boys. (Viz. non-trivial ref. Daily Breeze, etc., now deleted but in Google cache). One of the most active high school-centric sites on the web, nearly a decade old, the site has 700 pages of feedback from its vibrant user community, services alums spanning five decades, and also has served a notable role in establishing and preserving landmarks within the school and the community. Alexa ranking is poor because site users generally do not fit (decidedly narrow, I must say) demographic of those using Alexa toolbar; also, many of the heaviest users are on Powerbooks. Having deletion discussion on Feb 24, George Harrison's birthday, is an additional cruel irony to those who know Hawthorne High alumna and occasional site correspondent Olivia Harrison, HHS '78, George's widow.--Joseph Mailander
Yes but that website would be important to only one town. Jedi6 07:04, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not Delete Actually, it is an important site around the world. See the SLANGS listing in the notable section. The site is also very significant to the several towns in the South Bay area and is frequented by alumni from other schools in the area. The remaining Beach Boys also visit the site. --Don Di Tomasso. HHS Class of 1975. (Comment actually placed by user:69.234.158.44 --JiFish(Talk/Contrib))
  • Delete per nom. Bobby1011 03:14, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:WEB. savidan(talk) (e@) 05:12, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not notable. Jedi6 07:04, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as nn website. --Terence Ong 12:54, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I feel that Alexa rank of 800,168 is notable enough. Considering the existence about 100 million (figure may be higher-correct me if I am wrong) websites in the internet, it is a relatively popular site. --Siva1979Talk to me 14:54, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per JiFish.--Isotope23 16:37, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I believe some clarification is in order. Cougartown focuses on Hawthorne High School but it is dedicated to discussion and preservation of the history and culture of the entire region. There are many Courgartown participants from the surrounding communities that make up the greater South Bay and Airport area of Los Angeles (Inglewood, Manhattan Beach, Westchester, etc.). Many of these people worked (or their parents worked) in the aerospace/national defense industry (e.g., Boeing, Northrup, Rockwell, TRW) This site captures "oral" histories similar to those captured by Studs Terkel and other writers devoted to reconstructing history and culture from the vantage point of ordinary people. Wikipeida Entry for Studs Terkel The Cougartown reader is able to trace the evolution of the national and Los Angeles area media from the 1950s through the present (radio, television, etc). Events, significant and ordinary, are viewed through the prism of generations of a working class community. Literally, there is no other site on the internet that can convey this unique, generation spanning perspective. To my way of thinking, this makes Cougartown not just significant but important. W1P 16:56, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, Alexa is just too low. --Tone 17:09, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's hard to believe people put any credibility in Alexa numbers. I don't see any reference whatsoever to basing deletion on Alexa numbers in the WP:WEB. Secondly, there's good reason for that: Alexa is incompatible with Mozilla and Safari browsers, which account for a higher percentage of traffic in certain communities. I've been actively using this site for eight years, and every time I've used it, it's had three-figure traffic that day at very minimum. I have no stake in the matter other than as a longtime user of both Wikipedia and the site in question, but this seems to me a generational thing. Because forty-, fifty-, and sixtysomething people use a site more than younger people doesn't mean the site's less valuable or even less tech-vibrant. This site's navigation and posting is made entry-level deliberately, to encourage the maximum participation across the widest swath of people, technophile and technophobe, web-sophisticate and newbie alike. It's really a remarkable environment, very unique. Aside: if you're measuring your own blog rankings by Alexa, you're blowing your time. Joseph Mailander
    • Double vote: this user has already expressed desire to keep above. --Kinu t/c 17:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment:I thought this wasn't a "vote" whether to keep the site but rather a discussion of the relative merits of keeping the site. That means the "double vote" accusation is irrelevant (not to mention your "second" contribution to the discussion)W1P 19:59, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • What he means is your comment had "do not delete" in bold writing before it. This is potentally confusing, because a users final opinion should be presented this way. I careless closing admin may have mistaken you for two people, User:Kinu was simply making sure that wasn't the case. Anyway, you have corrected it now, thanks. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 16:52, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It is not a vote it is a gathering of opinions for consensus, but it is Extremely bad form to bold preface a statement with opinions like Keep, Delete, or Do Not Delete multiple times and could be construed as an attempt to confuse the closing admin into believing this is an opinion from a separate person. Assume good WP:FAITH thought because User:Joseph_mailander is a new user and probably was not aware of that tidbit of wiki-ettiquette. Also, Kinu was simply commenting. You can express comments, replies, etc as many times as you want (and it's nice to preface them with comment), but rendering multiple opinions is not looked upon kindly.--Isotope23 21:13, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Thank you for the suggestion. That is a good option. Yes, I notice that there is no article on Hawthorne High School in Wikipedia.Hawthorne and Beach Boys are two possible options. However, I hope there is an ultimate decision to keep the site. --Don Di Tomasso HHS 75
  • Do not Delete. As an official Alumnus of Hawthorne High , I wish to offer my opinion on the deletion of Cougartown from your encyclopedia. I strongly caution you against such an illogical & hasty action. The idea of deletion brings to mind the thought of censure and other forms of social control. To delete a factual reference to an actual website suggests there is fear of truth. We are not seeking a referendum to place Cougartown on Wikipedia; someone has already established that it already exists. An attempted deletion is an attempt to re-write history, or conceal an established fact. The senior graphic illustrator/draftsman at the Keck Observatory in Hawaii regularly references Cougartown because of its powerful value as a social tool. Although he attended Pasadena High School he finds Cougartown to be an accurate and important website.

    Where will you draw the line in regard to "deletion"? History when studied truthfully, accurately and completely is priceless, but a watered down, whitewashed & censured version of history is the product of fear. More than this is the very idea of what Wikipedia is designed and created to accomplish, the dissemination of information. To delete the reference to CougarTown in Wikipedia contradicts the core principle what it’s "founders" set out to accomplish. My I remind you that allowing someone to edit is altogether different than allowing anyone to delete! I would like to erase some things I do not like but it is far more important in this free society to equally regard opposing ideas. I have the notion that those who wish to delete Cougartown from Wikipedia may be attempting to cleanse their little cyber-world in order to create a perfect cyber-Eden. I suggest you leave well enough alone in the matter of deleting Cougartown, remember the moral of the Aesop's fable of Sour Grapes? Those wishing to delete Cougartown may simply be upset they did not attend such a "prestigious" run of the mill middle class high school that remains part of history. Thank You for your time.--- Neil LarsonHHS 71
    • Comment. The post from Neil Larson was sent at his request due to posting difficulties. The content can be verified by e-mailing him at [email protected]. --Don Di Tomasso HHS 75
    • Comment: Another day, another diatribe about censorship, revisionism, elitism, fascism, etc., etc. Instead of expending energy by making blind accusations against other editors of Wikipedia and its guidelines, you should try supporting your argument to keep this page with facts that are both verifiable and establish importance (for example, per WP:WEB). --Kinu t/c 00:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment. ...a tad self-righteous perhaps? Additionally, it would be helpful if you add more meaning to your terms: facts and importance. Perhaps, then we would not miss the mark. --Di Tomas.
  • Delete Importance of site to certain people does not merit an article. --Jay(Reply) 23:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. ...but that can be stated about any site. Additionally, site importance is only one consideration. --Don Di Tomasso HHS 75
    • Comment: Anecdotal evidence of importance does not prove conclusively general importance. On the other hand, such anecdotal evidence suggests that the site might have more importance than has been suggested by some in this thread. None of the dissenters have addressed my earlier point about Cougartown constituting a unique source for "social history" Cougartown's "importance" on that basis(verifiable by reading the variety of entries on the site), standing alone, combined with the anecdotal evidence of "importance" to "certain people" argues strongly in favor of retention. W1P 06:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: The action seems to have cooled on this discussion. However, I would like to point out for the record that my two comments discussing the importance of Cougartown as a site for "social history" stand unrebutted.W1P
      • I don't know what you mean by "social history", but that doesn't appear to be a criteria of WP:WEB. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 13:21, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: It has to do with the "importance" criteron. I explained social history with the link to Studs Terkel. W1P 06:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • As JiFish has tried to explain, "importance" is in and of itself not a criterion of WP:WEB. As a website, this topic is subject to different inclusion metrics. The comparison to Studs Terkel (who most certainly meets WP:BIO) is moot, as people and websites have different standards. The three criterion are listed on that page. Please read and explain how this site meets them, and we will consider that information. Also, your assertion that "importance" to "certain people" argues strongly in favor of retention is false; most if not all websites listed on AfD are obviously important to some people, but whether they are encyclopedically includable (again, if they meet WP:WEB) is crucial. --Kinu t/c 07:41, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: You missed the point of the reference to Studs Terkel. So let me try again: Studs Terkel revolutionized historical scholarship by writing "social history" Cougartown captures "social history" I was obviously not comparing the Cougartown website to any Studs Terkel entry as a "person" or a "website." You've taken my "assertion that "importance" to "certain people" argues strongly in favor of retention out of context. For your convenience, let me repeat the full context (which was in response to the "delete" vote cast by Jay who said (paraphrase) that importance to some people does not justify rentention):
"Anecdotal evidence of importance does not prove conclusively general importance. On the other hand, such anecdotal evidence suggests that the site might have more importance than has been suggested by some in this thread. None of the dissenters have addressed my earlier point about Cougartown constituting a unique source for "social history" Cougartown's "importance" on that basis(verifiable by reading the variety of entries on the site), standing alone, combined with the anecdotal evidence of "importance" to "certain people" argues strongly in favor of retention." Thus my assertion regarding "importance" to "some people" was COMBINED with an assertion of a more generalized "importance" of the site as a unique repository of "social history" This discussion was directed to the "importance" criteria only. I am not qualified to address the other aspects of "includability" but to this admittedly uneducated point of view, it seems like several others have addressed those elements effectively. W1P 18:32, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete ‘--James 23:54, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and Redirect to Hawthorne High School article if anyone thinks it worth their while to create one before termination of this AfD; and if nobody does, then Delete this.Staffelde 01:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, Wikipedia is not a repository of external links. WP:WEB applies. Stifle 15:20, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: Since Wikipedia is not a repository of external links and since Cougartown is a primary source of social history and not a "repository of external links," this means that Cougartown should not be deleted. W1P
      • This argument makes no sense at all. Wikipedia is not a repository of external links. Not "we delete articles about websites that are a repository of external links." --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 14:48, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • JiFish, can you try to explain what you are stating in a different way? You lost me. Dondt1 16:20, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • I'll try my best. User:W1P suggests that since Cougartown is not a collection of external links, it's article should be kept. This is not what the policy User:Stifle is quoting means. We don't care about the content of the site, so long as it meets WP:WEB. User:Stifle is saying Wikipedia is not a repository of external links. i.e. We should only have articles about websites that meet the inclusion criteria. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 17:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
            • JiFish, are you stating that Wikipedia does not permit external links in any area other than a page sectioned marked off as "External Links"? If so, is this an absolute requirement, a suggestion or a matter of percentage? Dondt1 19:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
              • No, that's not what I am saying at all. I'll try one last time. We don't have articles about websites just because the site exists. They must meet an inclusion criteria. The reason why: Wikipedia is an encyclopidia, not a collection of external links. The content of the article isn't in dispute here. (Although, what you said is broadly true, it's just not the issue. For more information, see WP:EL.) --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 19:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                • Thank you, JiFish. I understand now. Dondt1 19:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                  • Sorry if my earlier replies were confusing. Explaining things isn't my strong-point. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 22:20, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                    • No problem, JiFish. Thanks for the explanation. Dondt1 16:47, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: My argument makes no sense at all because it was a response to the assertion of Stifle that made no sense to me. It seems that "external links" means something different in this domain than it does in other contexts. W1P 18:32, 1 March 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Cougartown&oldid=1146464408"