Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Originaltrilogy.com

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete after discounted votes. -- Joolz 11:37, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Originaltrilogy.com

nn website, nn petition, advocacy. Zoe 23:22, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Delete all articles about online petitions, particularly those involving Meow Skywalker. — Lomn | Talk / RfC 23:26:14, 2005-09-02 (UTC)
Delete this. Nonnotable. Nandesuka 23:40, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The page was created by the fans for the fans. It is a rather significant petition, not to mention an almost constant active one with over 71,000 signitures. Hmm. I thought Wikipedia wasn't a paper dictionary. You guys seem to make it to look that way. Maybe that's just how it looks on paper, huh? Adamwankenobi 01:14, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia isn't a paper dictionary, or an online dictionary, or (more to the point) a web directory. Alexa rank 298,170. Delete. —Cryptic (talk) 01:35, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, 71,000 signatures is notable. Kappa 01:39, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Utter nonsense. Zoe 18:33, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
Keep There is *much* more to the site than just the petition, and it is a significant and active part of the sci-fi online fan community.
- THX1138's first edit. —Cryptic (talk) 02:45, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is a significant petition and a passionate fan community that works to perserve the films in their original versions. 3 September 2005 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.170.172.162 (talk • contribs) 04:07, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The petition may be notable, but the website is not. If we do keep this article, it needs to be rewritten. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 05:23, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Coffee 19:26, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep .seanwookie it is important to all star wars fans to keep this up--Seanwookie 20:26, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Seanwookie's only edits are to Originaltrilogy.com and this vote. Coffee 20:35, 3 September 2005 (UTC) [reply]
  - Including deleting the afd header. Zoe 21:18, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
    - Oh, and BTW, I'm a Star Wars fan, and it's not important me, so don't try to speak for people you don't know. Zoe 21:19, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
      - All votes are equal here. Next Coffee will be saying only non-star wars fans are allowed to vote! Adamwankenobi 21:27, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        It is not true that all votes are equal here. It is up to the closing admin to decide whether or not to count anons and users with minimal numbers of edits. Zoe 21:52, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
        
        I doubt I would say that, Adam. I'm a Star Wars fan. Coffee 04:38, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It needs to be rewritten, but I'd personally like to see it stay. 05:59, 3 September 2005 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.172.51.132 (talk • contribs) , his only edit
Delete. Not notable. Please note - this is NOT a vote. Unless accompanied by compelling arguments, input from very new users may, at the closing admins discretion, be ignored. Further, some people get really pissed off and vote delete when they see a large number of such votes. - brenneman^(t)^(c) 03:13, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm going to put here some remarks by a guy from that site that was deleted from the page: "IT'S PRETTY BAD WHEN A SITE LIKE WIKIPEDIA BECOMES NOTHING MORE THAN A NAZI REGIME TELLING US WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE AND WHAT IS NOT.-PSYCHO_DAYV@originaltrilogy.com" I couldn't agree more. Adamwankenobi 10:12, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Please do not encourage the vandals. —Cryptic (talk) 17:30, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    - He;s not a vandal, he created the page. Adamwankenobi 22:37, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      - Are you claiming that this is not vandalism? Furthermore, Wikipedia is not for self-promotion. —Cryptic (talk) 23:25, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
seanwookieThey created this site to bring together all kinds of star wars fans across the world together not so we can tell people what they can and can't say this is america isn't the freedom of speach important. WIKIPEDIA IS OPPRESSING OUR RIGHTS!
Delete. I haven't heard any reason why this is notable. We don't create articles for every petition online vote either. And can we please stop the "you're just against starwars fans" argument, that's just silly. I'm not even going to comment about Nazi comparisons. Please see Godwin's law. Jacoplane 22:27, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
seanwookieI never vadallised this site I never even edited it after they put the sign up.
DELETE not notable — Preceding unsigned comment added by G Clark (talk • contribs) 23:28, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Really, if anyone wanted info on OT.com then they would visit OT.com. --Kineticpast 09:58, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Kineticpast's only edit. —Cryptic (talk) 22:50, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Not if they didn't know what the address was! Adamwankenobi 05:25, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nominator.--nixie 05:26, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable in any sense of the word. - A Link to the Past (talk) 06:24, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
Keep. But with textual modifications. This site has roots in film history and film preservation and goes beyond just fanboy love. kapgar 15:17, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- kapgar's only edit is for this vote. Jacoplane 21:16, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Just to help you guys out, this is our discussion page over at OT.com on this possible deletion. Adamwankenobi 23:02, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the page. Word of mouth only goes so far, and friends have a tendency to forget what you were telling them about in the first place.

Delete. NN add a note about the campain to the List of changes in Star Wars re-releases and begone with it. - Dr Haggis - Talk 17:56, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.