Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MacTalk Australia

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 (non-admin close) RMHED (talk) 22:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MacTalk Australia

Delete. Fails WP:WEB. Do not see why this website is notable as it appears to one of the many computer talk forums found on the net. Trivial information with the article being created by and mostly being maintained by the web masters. Violation of WP:COI. Endless dan 14:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 14:25, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - What a massive bulk of trivia! Also very poorly referenced. There are 100s of Mac forums on the web. What makes this one special? It gets a mention in The Age twice (refs 23 & 46), both times in relation to finding features of the iTunes music store. I don't think that's enough to pull it over the line. The rest is just self referenced. According to WP:ORG, secondary coverage must be significant, which this is not.--Lester 23:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Jll (talk) 19:46, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Yes, I'm an admin of Mactalk Australia. 1st, we're regularly mentioned in news sites, especially this year. Yes, the page as it stands is very poor. I'll see if someone who isn't site staff will volunteer to re-write a better version. Could you suggest a similar community forum/web site that meets requirements so we have an example of what's considered proper? --Currawong2007 (talk) 13:40, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a matter of having a better looking article, it's a matter of meeting Wikipedia's standards of notability. Your website seems very informative, but it doesn't appear to warrant its own encyclopedia page.--Endless dan 19:42, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the couple of dozen mentions of MacTalk [1] on news sites and newspapers this year and previously need to be added. --Currawong2007 (talk) 04:42, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Those dozen mentions are in passing or using the website in reference only. None of those articles are asserting MacTalk as notable. --Endless dan 13:16, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The very first article in that search is specifically about the forum - not a trivial or passing mention. Kevin (talk) 03:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I think that the site is notable enough with the various mainstream media mentions as well as receiving an entire article on the site in the Courier Mail. [2] The long lists need to be converted to prose and the article needs a cleanup but it's certainly notable enough to stay. Mvjs (talk) 08:59, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Mvjs so long as the article is cleaned up. JRG (talk) 05:39, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but tag for multiple issues. WikiScrubber (talk) 09:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless cleaned up. Notability is probably present but the article as it is is a trainwreck. Stifle (talk) 12:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've done an initial major clean-up. Your request is entirely reasonable. --Currawong2007 (talk) 06:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Currawong has shown notability per independent sources, and the rest is a fix it issue, not a deletion issue. Kevin (talk) 03:43, 4 September 2008 (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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.