- 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. --Coredesat 03:44, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Theartproblem (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
New non-notable website (no Google hits!), written like an advert. JyriL talk 16:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Unless sources can be found to establish its notability. It's true that there are no google hits for "theartproblem", and I couldn't find anything relevant with "the art problem". Leebo T/C 17:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Per nominating argument. -- Mufka (user) (talk) (contribs) 17:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Do not Delete Google hits should appear within 1 week, Advert writing has been removed, article is neutral, worthy subject for submission -- Bjtaylor01 (user) (talk) (contribs) 19:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment What do you mean by "Google hits should appear within 1 week"? Also, removing the advertising doesn't solve the problem of notability. Leebo T/C 18:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Request Also, Bjtaylor01, in this post, you signed as Mufka, and then changed the signature to Bjtaylor01 in this edit. Please explain. Leebo T/C 18:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete blatant advert. - iridescenti (talk to me!) 20:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Request Answer I copied and pasted the example code when editing and it accidently included mufa's name, so I quickly changed it when I saw the final page. Bjtaylor 10:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Request Leebo what would you recommend to increase notability. There are no sales, or google clicks, or any source of income associated with this project. This is a new idea that has never been tried on this scale and I think it is a very interesting concept that could be a valuable contribution to wikipedia users who are interested in fractal art. If I had links to media articles on the project would that increase it's notability? Thanks for your time. Bjtaylor01 10:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply Wikipedia defines notability in the guidelines at Wikipedia:Notability. Essentially, notability is "worthy of notice." So, it's usually established by multiple publications in reliable sources that focus on the subject. Also, since this is your project, you should read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. It's strongly recommended that you do not write about subjects to which you may have difficulty retaining a neutral point of view. Leebo T/C 17:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply Can media publications be considered if available? This project is too subjective to ever be published in an academic journal. I think it is worthy of notice, but if it needs publications then I agree that it should be removed until publications can be created. I think this page would fall into a "events" category. Just to let someone know that this group tried this for x amount of years and failed, or succeed, but it seems that only media publications could support that. Thanks for your reply. bjtaylor01 T/C 17:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply You can read Wikipedia:Reliable sources to see what can be used to establish notability. Any source that is a reliable, fact-checking source can be used, it doesn't have to be an academic journal. Newspapers, magazines, etc. Can you give me any examples of things that might be usable? Leebo T/C 18:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply We are in the process of interviewing for media coverage on this, however it is not complete at this time. I am fine for deletion of this article until I can later present all of the media coverage with a resubmission at a future date. It would be the reno gazette journal which is the main newspaper in Reno, Nevada. At least I know what I can do for next time when I resubmit that page. I really appreciate your time and help on this. I will not try to do anything to retard the deletion of this article. bjtaylor01 22:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If the article is deleted, and you later have more sources, please do not recreate the article yourself. It is always recommended, per WP:COI that someone who is not affiliated with a subject write the article. You could present the sources to Wikipedia:Deletion review perhaps, but someone else should actually write and edit the article. Leebo T/C 15:00, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. As an example, there was an article about The Nine Planets, a venerable Solar System website that has existed for 12 years and has a number of mirrors across the Internet. The article was deleted since the website was deemed as not notable enough.--JyriL talk 10:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete non-notable student art project. Does not have multiple independent reliable sources. If and when it is reviewed as serious art in reliable publications, it can be added back. —David Eppstein 20:15, 8 April 2007 (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.