Revision as of 23:44, 23 August 2007 editItaliavivi (talk | contribs)2,551 edits A first-of-its-kind site wouldn't have other Misplaced Pages examples, of course.← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:48, 23 August 2007 edit undoItaliavivi (talk | contribs)2,551 editsm Expound.Next edit → | ||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
:::Italiavivi, please discuss the topic at hand, and can you please lay off on your ]? Can anybody give me an example of a similar article about any website, which only covers a single candidate in an election? Please give me examples.--] 23:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC) | :::Italiavivi, please discuss the topic at hand, and can you please lay off on your ]? Can anybody give me an example of a similar article about any website, which only covers a single candidate in an election? Please give me examples.--] 23:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC) | ||
::::I don't see how that is relevant. The webiste is notable, per Misplaced Pages's notability criteria. It's written in an NPOV manner. There's no reason to delete it. -] 23:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC) | ::::I don't see how that is relevant. The webiste is notable, per Misplaced Pages's notability criteria. It's written in an NPOV manner. There's no reason to delete it. -] 23:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC) | ||
:::::Of course, a first-of-its-kind candidate web site wouldn't have other examples of Misplaced Pages. Endroit is well aware of this, Chunky. See for why Endroit has followed me here. ]<sup>]</sup> 23:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC) | :::::Of course, a first-of-its-kind candidate web site wouldn't have other examples of Misplaced Pages. Endroit is well aware of this, Chunky. See for why Endroit has followed me here. He is a partisan Republican who is trying to sandbag an unrelated content dispute with claims I am "obsessed" with Sen. Obama because I created this new article. ]<sup>]</sup> 23:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:48, 23 August 2007
My.BarackObama.com
- My.BarackObama.com (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Blatant advertising and canvassing. An article advertising a website that's sole purpose is to garner support for a candidate in the 2008 presidential election. WebHamster 18:08, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, and oppose merging. Read the (many) references at the article. It was a first-of-its kind use of online social networking by a political candidate, and is a part of a notable trend (source: NY Times) toward online social networking. This article is not an advertisement, I created it after seeing this mainstream media coverage which came out today from Reuters. Italia 18:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Clearly notable. --Alksub 18:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep I see nothing inherently spammy about the article. It's supported by multiple non-trivial coverage in independent reliable sources. I don't really understand the canvassing allegation. -Chunky Rice 18:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. As-if this person actually needs free advertising. Burntsauce 18:25, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep and/or Merge. It is referenced several times by traditional media sources so seems to meet the notability criteria, but the article could be merged into Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2008 if push comes to shove. --Bobblehead 18:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep or Merge as per Bobblehead. --Mark H Wilkinson 18:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete If this article is about the use of online social networking in political campaigns, then change the article name and focus on that. Otherwise, it appears to be an advertisement for a website which violates WP:SPAM. Jogurney 18:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- This article's composition is clearly not an advertisement for the website. The specific website -- My.BarackObama.com -- has been by that name discussed in multiple third-party, reliable, mainstream sources. Italia 18:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- As far as I can tell, the reliable sources have discussed the trend of using online social networking as a campaign tool. I don't think the individual networking sites are notable or important enough to warrant their own articles. I would support a single article on the topic and it can reference the individual networking sites that are being used. I can't see the justification for setting up individual articles for each - it seems to border on advertising to me. Best regards. Jogurney 18:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- In its Page One business piece "BO, U R So Gr8," the Wall Street Journal discusses MyBO and only MyBO. Same with the CNet article. The Reuters piece overwhelmingly highlights MyBO. Italia 18:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe I'm misreading it, but the WSJ article clearly refers to multiple websites (Edwards' site gets significant coverage). Sorry, I don't agree with you. Jogurney 19:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- In its Page One business piece "BO, U R So Gr8," the Wall Street Journal discusses MyBO and only MyBO. Same with the CNet article. The Reuters piece overwhelmingly highlights MyBO. Italia 18:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- As far as I can tell, the reliable sources have discussed the trend of using online social networking as a campaign tool. I don't think the individual networking sites are notable or important enough to warrant their own articles. I would support a single article on the topic and it can reference the individual networking sites that are being used. I can't see the justification for setting up individual articles for each - it seems to border on advertising to me. Best regards. Jogurney 18:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- This article's composition is clearly not an advertisement for the website. The specific website -- My.BarackObama.com -- has been by that name discussed in multiple third-party, reliable, mainstream sources. Italia 18:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep as per Chunky Rice: notable by citations Tvoz |talk 19:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Redirect to Barack Obama (or to United States presidential election, 2008), while trimming the contents as much as possible. There's no need to have a separate article on this. See WP:NOT. Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox.--Endroit 23:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Note: To the closing administrator, User:Endroit has followed me here from another content dispute in which we disagree to make a point . He is of course entitled to participate wherever he likes, but his participation and vote should be weighed with that in mind. Italia 23:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Italiavivi, please discuss the topic at hand, and can you please lay off on your personal attacks? Can anybody give me an example of a similar article about any website, which only covers a single candidate in an election? Please give me examples.--Endroit 23:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see how that is relevant. The webiste is notable, per Misplaced Pages's notability criteria. It's written in an NPOV manner. There's no reason to delete it. -Chunky Rice 23:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Of course, a first-of-its-kind candidate web site wouldn't have other examples of Misplaced Pages. Endroit is well aware of this, Chunky. See this content dispute for why Endroit has followed me here. He is a partisan Republican who is trying to sandbag an unrelated content dispute with claims I am "obsessed" with Sen. Obama because I created this new article. Italia 23:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see how that is relevant. The webiste is notable, per Misplaced Pages's notability criteria. It's written in an NPOV manner. There's no reason to delete it. -Chunky Rice 23:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Italiavivi, please discuss the topic at hand, and can you please lay off on your personal attacks? Can anybody give me an example of a similar article about any website, which only covers a single candidate in an election? Please give me examples.--Endroit 23:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
- Note: To the closing administrator, User:Endroit has followed me here from another content dispute in which we disagree to make a point . He is of course entitled to participate wherever he likes, but his participation and vote should be weighed with that in mind. Italia 23:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)