Geeknights wikipedia article

Bronzdragon

Geeknights Wikipedia article is going to be deleted at 2009-04-26 21:08 because it is not a notable podcast.

thaneofcawdor

The hell? It won a Parsec Award, goddamnit! Doesn't that count for anything these days?

Kiey

I would think that and the number of panels they've done would be enough.

Starfox

The references got all fucked up with the new site.

Nuri

I would like to know their definition of "notable." It may well be that GN doesn't qualify.

Omnutia

Is it really that useful to have a Wikipedia article? Most people looking for Geeknights will probably go strait to the main site.

Vhdblood

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline

Walker

I understand now. A good chunk of the article doesn't have significant, reliable, secondary sources.

Nuri

Is it really that useful to have a Wikipedia article? Most people looking for Geeknights will probably go strait to the main site.

Agreed. I have never felt the need to research Geeknights, and I can't think of a situation where a Wikipedia article would be necessary.

Sail

Haven't you people ever made a Wikipedia article before? The first thing you always have to do is get lots of third-party sources stating the existence and significance of what you're writing about. Virtually this entire article is stuff Wikipedia sees as fluff. Hardly any of it is written academically and the kind of information that is listed reaks of fanaticism.

Let them delete it. We'll redo it the right way later.

Nuri

Haven't you people ever made a Wikipedia article before? The first thing you always have to do is get lots of third-party sources stating the existence and significance of what you're writing about. Virtually this entire article is stuff Wikipedia sees as fluff. Hardly any of it is written academically and the kind of information that is listed reaks of fanaticism.

Let them delete it. We'll redo it the right way later.

No. I haven't. I have better things to do with my time. That's not to say that writing an article is a waste of time for anyone, but I have plenty of productive things I'd rather do. Anyway, I feel the same way. If it's academically insignificant, then it's not a good article to have on Wikipedia anyway.

Kate Monster

While wikipedia is fun, I take everything I read there with a grain of salt (many articles are poorly cited, cite opinion, etc.). Having a wiki page is like a step above having a facebook page in my estimation. Not having one is fairly irrelevant.

Omnutia

Example of a useful Wikipedia article.

jefferson

Did anyone notice that the user who flagged the article seems to have a hate on for Anime Pulse and GeekNights? Said user also hasn't done anything but flag articles as not notable and for deletion.

Sail

I'm just surprised how many people who use Wikipedia regularly don't even understand the fundamentals of the site.

Walker

I'm just surprised how many people who use Wikipedia regularly don't even understand the fundamentals of the site.

I'm not. It's just a reference for most people, and as long as they get the information they want there's not much reason to go deeper. I use a dictionary regularly, but that doesn't mean I'm going to learn to write one.

Sail

I use a dictionary regularly, but that doesn't mean I'm going to learn to write one.

But you understand that the function is to provide a clear and precise explanation for what a word means. People who write fan articles about their friend's band don't seem to understand the function of Wikipedia.

Adelbert

They write to make their favorite band\book\podcast more famous, Wikipedia's purpose is irrelevant to them.