Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kumquat Computer Corporation

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 Not a snowball's chance in hell of being kept. Tznkai (talk) 22:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kumquat Computer Corporation[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am nominating this AfD because of BLP challenges. This web site has existed on Wikipedia since 2006 and is a parody web site which satires and criticizes the more significant results of the history-making business career of Carly Fiorina. [Refactored. This is not a forum. user:J aka justen (talk) 07:32, 5 November 2009 (UTC)] In this nomination, I am not making a recommendation either way: I am simply responding to the challenge and attempting to draw wider input from the community on the matter.--Popovvk (talk) 06:32, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Further, I see snow in the forecast. Simply not notable, no apparent reliable sources exist, and may well be an attempt to circumvent wp:blp's heightened sourcing requirement. user:J aka justen (talk) 06:39, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Article is about a parody website. No current sources in article (even before recent changes), none found after quick search. Link to website currently goes to a parody blog. As justen noted, this article is being used to "source" material for a BLP article. Parody sites are a dime a dozen (even after inflation!), this one doesn't have anything to establish notability. Ravensfire (talk) 13:02, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After years of stability, J suddenly tore the article down to a few sentences. In response, some solid citations have been added.--75.37.30.245 (talk) 14:00, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As the original author of the article and the owner of the Kumquat website, I agree - delete it. I do not approve of the recent expansion of the article. The original merely described the parody site and the artistic tools used to create it. I am not at all interested in getting involved in a political battle over this, period. Thank you for respecting my opinion. So go and delete it. LJ, Hampton, NJ. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.221.203.215 (talk) 16:18, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That stability is purely from obscurity more than anything else, but when this article was mentioned as supporting the notability for a reference in another article. Ravensfire (talk) 15:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help, help, help! The AfD nominators are chopping this down to two sentences with no citations! That is cheating! Help!--76.195.214.54 (talk) 17:03, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (tentative) - the article is undergoing tremendous revision. What started as an unremarkable blurb about an apparently non-notable(but IMHO bitingly funny!) parody, with no references, is as of this moment a superficially well-referenced article. However, deeper review shows the references either fail to support the apparently referenced statements of the article, or are dragged in for the sake of having another "reference" in the article, using a not-reliable-in-the-Wikipedia-sense source. An example of this is the statement in the article: "For many years, the name "Kumquat Computer Corporation" is a name that is occasionally used as a hypothetical business name in examples for real business law course academic problems", with 2 references. As George Carlin noted, the kumquat is "the funniest food of all"; it is utterly unremarkable that people have used it in made-up names; documenting that someone has done so adds nothing to article, drawing conclusions based on that fact that the name has been used elsewhere is also original research. Most importantly, the current version of the article is a WP:COATRACK for attacking Carly Fiorina. The tentative is because there's some outside chance that this article might be expanded into a real Wikipedia article, with proper references that demonstrate notability. At the moment however, the article is going the wrong way; better to revert to the original or delete and (if proper sources exist and notability established) start over. Studerby (talk) 18:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What references are you referring to? One academic paper may be mentioning to the actual subject of this article; the others are, as you put it, all superficial or unreliable. None establish, or even go anywhere near wp:web notability. user:J aka justen (talk) 19:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (tentative) First of all, thank you for your comments about the site itself. As the site creator and ORIGINAL article author, let me make a few additional comments about this matter. Back in 2004 when the site was created - and into 2005 when it was very popular (2 million distinct users) it was indeed notable. It was probably the most popular business parody on the web and it used some very creative fast turnaround artwork tools. That's why I put up the original article. It was never linked to any famous person's page although it did note that Karla Fidora was often compared to a real person. In 2005, we changed the site from talking about PH Corporation to Kumquat. The reason was that a lot of people did not understand the "HP" jokes and we had lots and lots of material from many years in the industry and wanted to broaden the appeal. That's when we put up the Kumquat domain name. Unfortunately, we had REAL projects to work on, so the fun project slipped into obscurity. Recently we put up the karlaforsenate site/blog which continues the Karla Fidora story. I decided to have the kumquatcomputer.com domain name go over there because the old site still has some loyal fans and I wanted to make sure they could easily find it. But it has nothing to do with Kumquat Computer - which is now just a memory. So the current article is obsolete and should be deleted. The new blog is not really notable - although I do really hope you all enjoy it. That is the full and complete story about Kumquat. Please feel free to contact me if you need any further information. Best regards, Lou. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.221.203.215 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 5 November 2009

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.