Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Chlamor (talk | contribs) at 18:36, 14 April 2006 (→[]: A comment on "notability": As currently stated in the Wiki guidelines/parameters the concept of notability is at best vague. An example of how the issue of notability). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Progressive Independent

Delete
This forum is not notable. Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox, and every small and moderately sized forum does not merit an article RWR8189 11:34, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Your afd is a total joke so we thought we'd give you one also. How dare you try to intimidate people here!
Not surprisingly Democratic Underground can't tolerate mention of alternatives to it fascist forum. Misplaced Pages is an open source for information. DU can prevent discussion of alternatives on their forum but not here. PI is notable enough to be listed as a prominent link on many Liberal and Progressive sites and has earned respect in the Progressive community.
Now kindly get off your imaginary soapbox. I'm afraid you'll break your neck.
Your entire interaction has been rude. What's your problem? Zoraida 11:53, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Please Don't disrupt Misplaced Pages to illustrate a point. I have no association with DU or any other "progressive" movement as you might derive from my username. Thank you.--RWR8189 12:26, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep with substantial editing -- We have articles about religious movements that have relatively few members (for example, Christian Exodus) so I think we can afford articles about smallish internet communities as well. After all, there's no real upper bound on how many articles Wiki can have. I'm also troubled whenever I see partisans of one faction attacking the articles of partisans of another faction. On the other hand, this article really needs work and Wikifying so that it doesn't read like a vanity posting/marketing brochure.Atlant 12:34, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

For the record, I am not a member of either "faction" Zoraida thinks he/she is fighting against. I just believe there need to bounds for notability, and this forum doesn't cut it.--RWR8189 12:40, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Seems like an advertisment more then anything --Cloveious 12:51, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete or prove notability and then substantial editing. It seems a case of using Misplaced Pages as Soap box. --Francisco Valverde 13:12, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - or if you can prove notability then I will change to keep. This does seem link an Ad for it. Aeon 13:20, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - unless substantial notability can be cited. Current article looks like an advertisement. Let be re-written in a years time IF the site becomes more notable.--Tollwutig 15:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as nn. Alexa ranking over 2.5 million, forum with only 741 registered users, which as such things go is tiny. RGTraynor 15:19, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Seems fairly non-notable right now and doesn't meet WP:WEB. That being said, I'm a bit suspicious of this nom based on what I've seen on the various talk pages, etc. Page has only existed a few hours and RWR8189's first attempt to contact the creator was after the AfD in response to Zoraida's vandalism of the AfD notice. Piss poor example of WP:CIVIL behavior and AfD process is what is keeping me from opining Delete.--Isotope23 16:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Strong KEEP (with editing to reduce the POVness). 'Important' and 'big' are not synonyms. Also, what makes anyone think the membership claims of other sites bear any relation to reality? (No, I'm not a member of that community)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.17.145.158 (talk • contribs) .

  Note: this vote is the anon editor 70.17.145.158's first contribution to Misplaced Pages.--RWR8189 16:19, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

No, it isn't. I simply didn't bother to log in. The political articles are so hag-ridden with ideology that I no longer like to spend my time trying to de-POV them. In this case I decided to add my comment because, while not a member of that community, I find it an important and near-unique resource. I'll repeat my thesis: 'big' and 'important' are not interchangable terms except among the hard-of-thinking.

I would also suggest that you seem to be working quite hard to get rid of this article, and I wonder what your motivation is. What are yourpolitics? Katzenjammer 16:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

My politics are conservative, and one should be able to derive that from my username. However if you care to look through my edit history you will find that I have also worked to keep non-notable conservative forums off of Misplaced Pages as well. I had never heard of this forum until it was repeatedly added into an article that I frequently watch, and this article was subsequently created.--RWR8189 16:42, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I think we have something significant here: you believe that your username somehow reveals your politics. I'd suggest that your belief and your opposition to the PI article come from the same place: a partisan and parochial view of what's important. Katzenjammer 17:26, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

You say that if I check your edit history I'd find that you've worked to kill off articles on 'non-notable' conservative fora too. Perhaps you could provide some pointers? Because I did check, and couldn't find anything that would support your claim. Katzenjammer 21:25, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Here in the talk section of the Free Republic article is a discussion based on my proposed exclusion of some non-notable conservative forums from mention in the article. If anyone ever created an article about them, I would slap an AfD on it as fast I did this one, and for the same reasons.--RWR8189 13:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

In other words, you offer the lowest price in town ...for the products you don't have in stock. The reality is that the only articles you've tried to have deleted about political sites are about non-GOP ones (language fixed to make my point more clear--talk is cheap, so I don't count self-serving claims about how balanced you'd be if ever the occasion arose. The fact is that you have only tried to get articles deleted about non-GOP sites). I believe that's significant here. Katzenjammer 15:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I just showed you two non-notable conservative sites whose mention I opposed in another article. My only concern in this issue is staying consistent with Misplaced Pages:Notability (websites), not partisan politics, and it seems a consensus is forming that agrees with me.--RWR8189 16:10, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

• Reminder: Please reference this guideline when voting: Misplaced Pages:Notability (websites). Clearly this website does not meet any of the criteria.--RWR8189 16:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Both of 'em for egregious violations of Godwin's Law in pleading their case that the other should be deleted (as an aside to both complainants, remember what George Orwell had to say about the casual flinging of the word Fascist around). Either that, or keep and put a mutual restraining order on the lot of them. Pat Payne 16:43, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete it's just not notable enough for inclution. --Eivind 18:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nn blog. And the content of the article is extremely soapbox-y. Fishhead64 21:20, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. -- getcrunkjuice 22:15, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete nn political forum plug unfortunately leading to the use of meatpuppets and WP:POINT violations.--Jersey Devil 22:50, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete delete delete.  RasputinAXP  c 23:38, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

• Keep (with editing) - The basis for keeping this entry is the (notability of the) level of the discourse, not the number of members. I am an English professor and a member of the National Council of Teachers of English, the National Writing Project, Rhetoricians for Peace, and am a discussant on the PI board. I can engage there without having my intelligence insulted. Thus: notable for the level of discourse. - Clark Iverson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iverson (talk • contribs) 01:00, 14 April 2006 (UTC). Also, user's first edit.

• Doc, if you're an English professor, presumably you teach your students to avoid rhetoric fallacies -- such as appeal to authority or strawman arguments. The former I think is obvious, but here's a hint for the latter: no Misplaced Pages notability standard I'm aware of refers to anything like "level of discourse" or other needlessly vague subjective standard.--Calton | Talk 01:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

• Calton, yes I do teach those in the appropriate course, along with more than 40 other specific fallacies, so here's a hint right back: I did not claim that my comments were true because of my professional expertise. I implied (claimed) that my professional expertise offered me some insight into the reasons for deletion (i.e.- notability). And now that you mention it, straw man rebuts the point that the discussant wishes was made rather than the actual point. Iverson 15:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

There is no such 'notablity standard'. It's a mere guideline, and clearly states that its very existence is problematic. If appeals to authority --and I'd suggest you take another look if you think that is what Clark Iverson is doing-- are bad, what are appeals to factitious authority?Katzenjammer 07:58, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete and what's this "notable for the level of discourse"?????? I'm sure you can achieve similar discourse in a dinner conversation. Is that notable? ccwaters 01:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
• Seven hundred members is nothing, and video game/animation/other otaku forums at similiar levels of membership get nuked all the time, so delete. Being very very earnest doesn't get you an exception. And to some of the commenters above, if you want to practice the American Left's traditional arts of Dogmatic Splintering and the Circular Firing Squad, please do so elesewhere. --Calton | Talk 01:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nn--MONGO 02:11, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete This is an encyclopedia, not a catch-all for anything anyone thinks might be an interesting topic for idle discussion. KillerChihuahua 12:18, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment I believe the opposition to the PI entry has a political rather than a principled basis. I note, for example, the fact that RWR8189 is a Reaganite who has only objected to non-GOP political sites, and Calton's objection ("American Left's ... Circular Firing Squad...elsewhere") is couched in terms frequently applied to progressive posters at DU. I would also point out that neither the (trivial) Conservative Underground entry nor the entry for the People For Change forum are being similarly attacked despite the fact that neither community would meet the 'notability' guidelines (and no, I don't think they should be attacked; they, like PI, are signficant in their own ways). Katzenjammer 16:06, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: Are you seriously alleging that each and every one of the sixteen editors who have found this article to be non-notable have political biases? Or that people who hold to a particular political stance are incapable of disinterested application of Misplaced Pages's rules? Happily, we presume no such thing here as a general rule. RGTraynor 16:14, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't aware being a "Reaganite" precluded one from participating in Misplaced Pages. I have already pointed to objections I had with the inclusion of non-notable conservative forums in other places, but you seem intent on ignoring them, while also ignoring Misplaced Pages:Notability (websites) guidelines. I also just became aware from your comment of Conservative Underground and its AfD, and if it was still open I would have voted to delete as well.--RWR8189 16:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

'Your actions speak so loudly that I can't hear a word you say' Katzenjammer 16:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

You don't seem to be interested in rational discussion, so I will let you be.--RWR8189 16:32, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I have no political affiliations, and the only bias I have with political parties is that they should all be disbanned. That being said, my delete was due to lack of Notability, if that changes so does my opinion.--Tollwutig 18:03, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:WEB.--Isotope23 17:25, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Chlamor 18:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)Trying Again: A comment on "notability": As currently stated in the Wiki guidelines/parameters the concept of notability is at best vague. An example of how the issue of notability as relates to PI can easily be put to rest is the simple fact that Pepole For Change currently has an entry when PI gets 14,000 more hits with google.More later. (chlamor)Chlamor 18:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

• Internal link templates