Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Quiet Internet Pager (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 08:36, 23 December 2009 editJBsupreme (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers30,453 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 19:14, 23 December 2009 edit undoKing of Hearts (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators68,820 edits Closing debate, result was keepNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top

Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''keep'''. ] ] ] ] &spades; 19:14, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
===]=== ===]===
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|W}}
<div class="infobox" style="width:50%">AfDs for this article:<ul class="listify">{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quiet Internet Pager}}</ul></div> <div class="infobox" style="width:50%">AfDs for this article:<ul class="listify">{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quiet Internet Pager}}</ul></div>
:{{la|Quiet Internet Pager}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>{{•}} ) :{{la|Quiet Internet Pager}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>{{•}} )
Line 51: Line 57:
**** That is good and well, but challenging the reliability of sources is a healthy part of the editorial process, not vandalism. I stand by my original request asking you to withdraw your comment and assume good faith. Happy holidays, ] (]) 08:36, 23 December 2009 (UTC) **** That is good and well, but challenging the reliability of sources is a healthy part of the editorial process, not vandalism. I stand by my original request asking you to withdraw your comment and assume good faith. Happy holidays, ] (]) 08:36, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the ]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- ] ] 16:30, 22 December 2009 (UTC)</small> *<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the ]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- ] ] 16:30, 22 December 2009 (UTC)</small>
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page. <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

Revision as of 19:14, 23 December 2009

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:14, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Quiet Internet Pager

AfDs for this article:
Quiet Internet Pager (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unable to locate multiple instances of significant coverage in reliable sources to indicate notability. Only good piece of coverage I can find is the one Softpedia review. Cybercobra (talk) 00:26, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep The several Russian reviews in reliable sources convince me this is notable. I would Withdraw the AfD, but cannot as there have been Delete votes. It would be nice if someone were to actually add the sources uncovered in this AfD to the article itself. --Cybercobra (talk) 22:18, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The DRV closer specifically stated: "Any editor who wishes may list it at AfD". The only sources as to its popularity are what appears to be an unscientific user poll (and therefore not useful for notability determination) and a statement from its corporate owner that it was its "most popular service", which since it is only a relative measure is not that useful (and the characterization of it as a "service" does not instill confidence in the reliability of the information). I can't speak as to the rest of your comment as I was not involved in the previous AfD. --Cybercobra (talk) 23:13, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Direct link instead of given above: Maksa (talk) 19:24, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
  • keep It is the MOST popular icq client novadays. (At least more popular than native ICQ). Just dont be lazy to use google to prove it. 94.27.104.152 (talk) 08:36, 20 December 2009 (UTC) This template must be substituted.
  • KEEP there's a lot of articles in wikipedia about email clients that nobody knows, but one of the most used messengers should be deleted? wth? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bull-Dozer (talk • contribs) 11:59, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Strong keep.
    • It is numerously covered in russian offline and online newspapers/magazines, including non-IT-oriented ones, such as Lenta.Ru, Gazeta.Ru, Vedomosti, Computerra, Home PC (links are easily googleable), including "main topic" articles (what is more than required for the "Significant coverage" point of the notability). The magazine/newspaper names above should fall under "Reliable", "Secondary sources", "Independent of the subject".
    • Quick search confirms that it is mentioned by Top 15 Russian Internet Properties by Audience Reach, February 2008 report by ComScore, NASDAQ-trading marketing research agency, as having 26.6% reach in the audience, as well as in the TNS reports as one of the two most popular ICQ clients in Russia. I believe, these are the undisputably significant and independent sources. Honeyman (talk) 18:11, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep. Hey, people, why won't you delete QQ? It is also a hugely popular IM-client on it's local market. Anyway, here's some more reviews , , , .
    I am pretty much shocked and feel like I'm banging head agianst the wall — I have to prove the popularity of the client I see everywhere just because it is used primarily in russophone countries. And yet the popularity is not a criteria. OMG, what is a criteria for a chat client?
    Ah, I see Gajim is set up for deletion too. Way to go, WP. I can also suggest Fluxbox or xcdroast for deletion — why not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.115.133.181 (talk) 21:11, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep. Do you remember WP:IGNORE?? At least 10 million people from Russia, Germany, Israel, Bulgaria, Ukraine, etc use QIP. Is it not enough for article? --RussianSpy (talk) 23:52, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
    • Emotions won't help. You'd better go search for reliable sources and post them here or in the article - it is quite easy to find them, in fact, if you know Russian. --Maxxicum (talk) 04:24, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
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.