Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fingerskate
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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 00:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fingerskate[edit]
PLEASE NOTE. Fingerskate has been moved to Fingerboard (skateboard)
Article version nominated here: This was nominated for PROD-deletion with an extensive reason (see PROD'd version). In my opinion, if an article has >500 edits, I really think it should be considered here, as that indicates a significant interest from multiple editors over an extended period of time. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 15:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: The article was moved in the middle of this AFD. That was a poor decision on the part of the mover. The article is now located at Fingerboard (skateboard). --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:24, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Didn't realize that moving articles should be stalled until an AfD had run its course. Benjiboi 00:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It is not forbidden, but it can confuse the issue and there is usually no pressing need to move it, no reason not to wait until the AFD is over. Moving is sometimes part of an AFD outcome; for future reference, I would encourage placing a comment suggesting moving as part one's input to the discussion rather than boldly moving during the discussion. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 14:07, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Didn't realize that moving articles should be stalled until an AfD had run its course. Benjiboi 00:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
CLOSING ADMIN. Please note article was moved so AfD discussion is correctly linked to talk page. Benjiboi 00:52, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. This just seems to be an advertisement for a couple companies. Tavix (talk) 16:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
* Delete Reads like spam, seems to be just an advertisment for Tech Dech. Changed to Keep per article being rewritten well. STORMTRACKER 94 00:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I put the WP:PROD there and I stand by my reasoning. I should have counted the edits before prodding it, however. Looking back at the edits, I see that a disturbing number of them are summarized as reverts ("rv," "reverting edits by... to...," etc. esp. of vandalism), and a large portion of the edits are IP addresses. Also note that at the present time, the article has no talk page (old talk page was deleted). These are not rationales for deletion, for those see the old revision above. --Thinboy00 @867, i.e. 19:48, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Addendum I feel that the tips and tricks book with a high page rank (see the old revision with the prod) is not a reliable source, as it contains little information about the subject itself and instead focuses solely on quirks and, dare I say it, advanced usage instructions. Or at least that's what I infer from its title and editorial review; the latter describes it as a "step by step, illustrated guide." --Thinboy00 @879, i.e. 20:06, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I've restored Talk:Fingerskate to accompany the article through AFD, as Thinboy00 pointed out it had been deleted. I should have considered doing that when I brought the article here. Thanks. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:45, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Thinboy00 and his PROD. Appears to be advertising Tech Deck and Finger Flip Inc. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 21:06, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - These were a relatively popular fad a few years back. There might be able to be enough sources to put together a non-advertising article. Obviously the article as it stands now is in poor shape. I think if deleted, there should definitely be no prejudice against recreation should it be written in an unbiased tone. matt91486 (talk) 02:59, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I would also agree that finger skateboards should be notable, as I do seem to recall them being somewhat popular when I was a teenager. If third party sources can be found, I would say keep. This article is a total mess, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't have an article about finger skateboards if they are a notable phenomenon, which they may well be.-h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 20:33, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I've notified WP:RESCUE.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 20:44, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete without prejudice. We should have an article about fingerskating (the subject is notable) but this one just isn't it. (jarbarf) (talk) 05:06, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per gatesr494. This article has a bunch of advertisments and should be deleted right away. gatesr494 (talk) 00:43, 23 December 2007 (EST)
- Comment. I feel that with work, this could be a WP:HEY. It just needs that work. I found a patent for fingerboards using a Google Scholar search.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 00:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. I certainly may regret it but my hunch is that any article transwikied into ten languages has some merit that is currently overlooked. Seems like this was a fad that is still going but the article could certainly use some work. To me this is exactly what wikipedia should cover, some obscure hobby or toy (maybe it's both) that has a devoted fan base. I would hope wikipedia would cover it in a fashion befitting learning about the subject even if I never bother with it again. Benjiboi 02:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- At least one of those is a mechanical translation of a previous version of this article. No !vote, but you should regret basing an argument on other Wikis. I would also like to add that we have had simultaneous AfDs on en: and fr: before. (You should be able to find the one I have in mind by looking at my contribution history on fr:. I just linked the AfDs; I don't think I started either.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 18:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment No comment except to say there are a lot of videos on youtube. E.g. [1] TableManners U·T·C 04:48, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Version now current is substantially improved and an asset to Wikipedia. I would urge all previous commenters to look at the article again, since it is much improved from nomination time. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 04:34, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Still working on it. Benjiboi 04:36, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Good lord! It looks like these things go back to the 1970s and became collectible toys around 1999 with all manner of accesories. This is really quite a developed world and I will try to do it justice but it will have to be piecemeal as it's getting late. If anyone wants to help the trick seems to be using the words "finger board" with one of the manufacturers. These things are regularly sold on Ebay as well. Benjiboi 06:34, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
*Comment. Article re-written. Benjiboi 23:40, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - the current version is immensely better and this should not have been nominated in the first place, there were plenty of decent versions to revert to in the history, almost all of the problematic content was added in the past couple weeks. Mr.Z-man 20:43, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I didn't see the version that was nominated for deletion, but the current version is an obvious keeper. Well sourced, interesting reading. Very informative to somebody who had never heard of the subject. Jeffpw (talk) 21:16, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep - Nominating for deletion is not an appropriate response to a recent history of poor quality edits. Please read the guidelines more carefully. The topic is highly notable: I remember kids playing with these stupid fingerboard things all the time in jr. high and highschool TheBilly (talk) 23:28, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Snowball keep now, obviously. Great work!--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 00:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Clearly satisfies WP:N and WP:V. It's been mentioned in mainstream business magazines and is manufactured as toys by major manufacturers like Mattel. --Jack-A-Roe (talk) 01:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Surprisingly well sourced. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 11:30, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - to those who say that the article is notable but that this article is inappropriate, could you clarify your objections, perhaps on Talk:Fingerboard (skateboard), so that editors can make it more appropriate? :) Cheers, Iamunknown 17:21, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I think all those comments predate the article re-write, although any constructive comments are certainly welcome. Benjiboi 17:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I'll second that; the rewritten article is quite appropriate for inclusion. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
CLOSING ADMIN. Please note article was moved so AfD discussion is correctly linked to talk page. Benjiboi 00:52, 26 December 2007 (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.