Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rndnet

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 - Liberatore(T) 17:34, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rndnet[edit]

Criminal facilitation. Rndnet's webpage makes it clear what they're up to, and so does the Wikipedia article. If Wikipedia frowns upon spam, then helping people make money illegally and steal services shouldn't be tolerated. -Barry- 09:58, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per Barry. Services that promote or facilitate illegal activities should already have a high level of notability before having an article (when having the article allows readers to participate in the activities), which is likely to make them more popular. -- Kjkolb 13:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'm not really comfortable with the notion that simply providing a communication channel that criminals might conceivably use is itself criminal facilitation (how would good old cleartext RFC 1459 "facilitate" anything?). But the article clearly fails to demonstrate notability of its subject, which is enough for me. Henning Makholm 20:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: "19 users and 12 invisible" when I checked in. Hardly a "large IRC network". Zetawoof^(ζ) 01:18, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed the "large" claim. It's even less notable than I thought. You can compare the popularity of Rndnet with other IRC networks here. -Barry- 02:09, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I am unconvinced by the claim of "criminal facilitation", but there is absolutely no evidence of notability for the subject. MCB 06:51, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I am not comfortable with Wikipedia being used to spread criminal awareness and activities over the Internet. --Skenmy 09:13, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This appears to be completely nn. [1], very low user counts, nothing on netsplit.de, etc. Kotepho 13:55, 9 April 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.