Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blizzhackers

Blizzhackers

With Alexa rating of 157,855, fails WP:WEB despite creator's laudable intentions on talk page. Daniel Case 15:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: This AfD page was also vandalized, but, I think, by someone trying to get at the creator, not the creator himself, since the anon in question also vandalized the article. He's been warned.

Daniel Case 16:26, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Remember people, just like the Wiki pages on small cults who commit 30 man suicides(as extreme as an example that might be), this is for information purpous only, on the history of a site that strongly effected many of Blizzard_Entertainment's top games. Yes it was a hacking site, but it niether supports or denotes it, being unbiased, and is completely factual. Also this page is not meant to support any hacks or link to any. So far Im getting the idea that people here think its supporting it, and that being their reason for deletion. This is simply not the case. Salgat 21:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete. Diablo 2 Hacking site. Off with their heads. Grafikm_fr 16:15, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Undecided have any of the big names posted there? any significant cheats? Kotepho 17:07, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment.the phrase "such as the TPPK which enhanced dueling or player killing." is enough for an RfD. It is not enhancing, it's ruining the game. Grafikm_fr 17:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• No, that phrase is not a reason for deletion. POV is not a problem that requires deletion. Also, your stance that it is ruining the game is soapboxing in the same sense. Kotepho 17:23, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is common sense, not soapboxing. Anyway, the rfd was made (and not by me), we'll let the votes decide.. ^_^ Grafikm_fr 17:48, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment There have been many significant big name 'hackers' posting on BH, including mousepad (of D2 maphack fame), the makers of the prolific d2hackit program, the creator(s) of d2jsp and other 'bots', and other programs that have significantly affected the game. The forum has enough history and has been home to enough various programs and people who had a major impact, for better or worse, on Blizzard's games, that it deserves some mention. If imageboards like 4chan and forum sites like SomethingAwful or LUElinks get their own articles, certainly a board that has had over 200k registered users should be permitted a mention. A small disclaimer on this rant, I do have a slight bias in favour of keeping it as I am an staff member there, but I feel that this does not detract from my points.- Flaming_cows aka -Cthulhon 01:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: nn forum site - no indication that it meets WP:WEB. --Hetar 18:31, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Hetar. -Objectivist-C 19:59, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep see supporting comment above. -Cthulhon 01:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment': This user's sole edits are to the article and this discussion. Daniel Case 02:29, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Does that detract from my points in any way? That seems like an ad hominem attack rather than a reason to not keep the article. And for the record, I have made other edits to various articles as an anonymous contributor.--Cthulhon 02:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to assessing the community consensus on whether this article will be kept, the history of the contributors to this discussion is relevant. Those users who pop up in response to the discussion (usually arguing "keep") are not considered to have truly put in the time on the project that would make their opinion worthwhile, and frequently their votes are discounted or discarded altogether. This is well stated in our deletion policies, in order to avoid ballot-stuffing using sock- or meatpuppets.

That you have made edits under other IPs is ... well, that's nice. Since we have no way of verifying this as you didn't start an account until today, we can't really say one thing or the other about your credibility on that basis. As it is we have no way of knowing what your agenda is here (If you want to be taken more seriously in this sort of discussion in the future, by all means edit under your current account and build up a history). Daniel Case 02:44, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Blizzhackers is a well known website. New users will want some information about it before using it, to make sure that the content available is trustworthy.

• Comment Blizzhackers is far from being about 'hacking' despite the name. Its a community of relatively good, knowledgable people, and a rich source of information, on programming, graphics and general life problems. In my honest opinion, in relation to gaming, Blizzhackers is one of the more important pages on the internet. Deleting it would be a travesty - Jake aka -JsRide

• Keep agree with supporting comments. -JsRide
• Keep Blizzhackers has been around for many years now, and has had a major impact on Blizzard Entertainments games. Many (in)famous diablo 2 hackers have posted on these forums, such as Mousepad, Netter, Rishodi, Darawk, and the like. Whether or not people agree of disgree with game hacking shouldn't really be an issue I think, as, either way, it HAS had a profound effect on the game. It has also gone through many changes, and has faced legal issues with blizzard and still come through. Also, similar groups, such as myg0t have a wiki, although blizzhackers has probably been the home to many more hack releases than it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by KSagle (talk • contribs)

Above is user's first and only edit. Daniel Case 02:16, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Definitely Keep Has a large number of users, and well known programmers. Has had a big impact on many games esp. Diablo II. - stuck_fugu aka - Nevkeet
• Delete unless shown to meet WP:WEB. 129.81.72.204 02:19, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Blizzhackers has been the subject of published work independant of the site. Specifically, it has been discussed on TechTV, with on of its more notable members appearing personally as a guest.--Cthulhon 02:28, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Here is the inevitable post on their forums: [1] --Hetar 02:40, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]