Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Self Service Science Forum
- 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 delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 04:14, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Self Service Science Forum (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable web forum. Can not find any reliable sources covering the forum. Fails WP:WEB. Gogo Dodo (talk) 08:58, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I can find no evidence that this online forum has made any significant impact to science or any other areas of society. I can find no mention in reliable sources, so it doesn't seem notable. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 11:38, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:52, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:53, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment There seems to be a sockpuppet issue on the article. I have semi-protected it, which would make improvements by new users more difficult. This may be relevant to consider for a deletion discussion. --TeaDrinker (talk) 01:33, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Incorrect that it's not notable or has little impact - It's very popular in Australia and around the world. There are visitors from around the world though most are locally from Australia. There are few science-oriented sites as good as SSSF, due to the style of the site. Billzilla (talk) 23:08, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:13, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
SSSF is by far Australia's major science-related internet forum, receiving over 400000 posts per annum. It is the first internet forum listed if you Google "site:au science". Ordinary Person (talk) 11:37, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Does not meet the Wikipedia definition of notability under WP:WEB. Popularity does not equal notability QU TalkQu 16:50, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. When I Google "site:au science" I don't see it. Nor had I heard of it until now. It has no news hits and doesn't seem to be all that notable, but broadening the article to cover all of ABC Science Online may perhaps be appropriate. -- 202.124.73.39 (talk) 07:39, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Me too - I get New Scientist as the top list, SSSF does not feature. Regardless, Google hits is a very poor indicator of notability; unless reliable sources can be found to attribute notability, the article should be deleted. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 19:59, 25 March 2012 (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.
You've made a f'ing stupid decision. Billzilla (talk) 07:33, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]