Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The virtual wall

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. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 00:22, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Virtual Wall[edit]

Written by user:Thevirtualwall. Undoubtedly a conflict of interest. Does it constitue spam? -- RHaworth 08:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'd say so. Delete as spam, open to speedy. MER-C 09:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The wiki has pages for notable websites. I think that The Virtual Wall (and/or other Vietnam memorial websites, such as Vietnam Veterans Memorial (The Wall-USA)) should not be merged with Vietnam Veterans Memorial to reduce confusion. Snowman 11:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge/redirect to Vietnam Veterans Memorial. A Google news search [1] comes up with four articles in four different papers, all of which are fairly recent. Two articles are mentions of it being used, the third [2] is solely about the Virtual Wall, and is copy-pasted into a second paper. I'm not quite sure if it deserves its own article, or if it should be reduced to a paragraph or two on the main memorial's article. (I'm leaning towards keep.) In any case, it should be rewritten by someone else to avoid a conflict of interest. Quack 688 12:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't believe it passes WP:WEB, regardless of the author. Akihabara 13:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge/redirect to Vietnam Veterans Memorial per Quack. I don't see any blatant advertising, so I don't think it's spam. Gzkn 13:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There was quite a bit of media coverage on this a while ago. --- RockMFR 16:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I'm not sure I have a voice in this forum, but I'd like to point out a few things: 1) The article is no longer a conflict-of-interest because it was completely rewritten by Snowmanradio. Thank you! He didn't even use any of my screen shots. 2)The Virtual Wall doesn't sell anything and we don't accept donations, so the article isn't advertising. 3) The Virtual Wall gets 6000 to 7000 unique visitors a day; probably more than most brick-and-mortar memorials. 4) The Virtual Wall will be 10 years old in March, it isn't just a flash-in-the-pan. Thanks for reconsidering. The Virtual Wall 04:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC) Jim Schueckler, Founder and VP of The Virtual Wall. Wikipedia username Thevirtualwall.[reply]
Keep. The Virtual Wall meets the critera of being newsworthy. Some 12 or so major newspapers have had articles, including an article that occupied about half of page 2 of The Washington Times and a US Department of Defense publication. See links at

http://www.virtualwall.org/press/index.html#articles Thanks for reconsidering - The Virtual Wall 02:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/Redirect Doesn't need its own article, but might do well inside Vietnam Veterans Memorial Tzaquiel 17:06, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable external reference: eg. a laudatory mention in a DoD press release should quality: here[3] The site is also referred to by the congressionally-chartered Vietnam Veterans of America [4] In fact, according the DoD statement, the content of virtualwall.org are regularly uploaded to the official virtual wall [5]Cdamama 08:37, 17 December 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.