Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W.bloggar: Difference between revisions

W.bloggar

W.bloggar was nominated for deletion on 2005-02-11. The result of the discussion was "keep". For the prior discussion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W.bloggar/2005-02-11.

nn piece of software; every google hit after the first page is a blog post of someone testing out aforementioned software Hosterweis 07:32, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - advertising for a useless software product - Femmina 07:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Above user is a participant in the GNAA "war on blogs". Rhobite 01:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
    • I won't write this under every time it occurs, but this is totally immaterial. We comment on the contribution, not the contributor. If someone wants to aid Wikipedia by improving the ratio af signal to noise, I don't care if they eat babies for breakfast. They could go about it with a bit more subtlety, and the quality of the nominations would be improved by linking to the searches (and perhaps an Alexa ranking per WP:WEB or the actual blogs), but ad hominum attacks are not on. - brenneman^(t)(c) 01:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Incognito 07:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Above user is a participant in the GNAA "war on blogs". Rhobite 01:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as nominated. It's ok to cover some wildly popular blogging tools, but there's no point to list hundreds of the ones like these. --Timecop 07:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Above user is a participant in the GNAA "war on blogs". Rhobite 01:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• weak keep Several hundred hits indicates at least somewhat wide use, which is why this passed VFD the first time around. Also, fix the page so it actually links to here. Night Gyr 08:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Advertisement --Depakote 11:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Above user is a participant in the GNAA "war on blogs". Rhobite 01:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Proto t c 13:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Jmax- 19:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  • All of the above user's edits are to blog AfD's except for 2. Rhobite 01:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Tapir
  • All of the above user's edits are to blog AfD's except for 8. Rhobite 01:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• Disagree with “delete” arguments. I don’t blog, and I don’t use Windows, but I disagree that this software is useless, and I see nothing here that’s blatantly subjective, so I don’t think it constitutes “advertising” any more than does, say, “Microsoft Windows.” The only thing that’s missing here is a comparison (or link to a comparison) to like software. For instance, Wikipedia is probably the only hope for a query like “show me a list of blog client software that implements the MetaWeblog protocol.”
  To say this is an “advertisement” (in the sense of “marketing”) is tantamount to saying that this was contributed by a W.bloggar insider, is it not? (Don’t confuse “advertising” with an enthusiastic user’s testimonial.) Frankly I consider that a reckless assertion, not (evidently) based on fact.
  I don’t have any opinion on W.bloggar’s notability though. —Fleminra 19:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete point above notwithstanding, this is nn, non-encyclopedic. Eusebeus 20:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Hosterweis. There is no shortage of tried-once blogs and no shortage of crap software for making them with. Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 22:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, well-known blog software. Rhobite 01:09, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, 320,000 google hits. --Interiot 01:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)