Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Habbo Hotel

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 speedy

talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - (View log

)

• Strong Keep, gets 377 overall hits at
  WP:WEB #1 fairly easily. Zagalejo 18:17, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Note: This debate has been added to the
  list of CVG deletions. PresN 18:17, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Speedy Keep I concur with PresN. The nominator's claim has no base, might as well close this already. Just H 18:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It's already been demonstrated that there are plenty of sources available to continue building the article, passing
  WP:WEB. I'd be looking for a bit more than "non-notable" as justification for deletion, particularly when that doesn't ring true. QuagmireDog 18:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep per above; subject has received non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable sources. --Muchness 19:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep massively notable, no deletion reason given. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:35, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I remember seeing a rather massive article in Wired or somewhere which discussed Habbo Hotel. Notability appears quite well established. Zetawoof^(ζ) 20:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Extremely strong keep, even speedy. Would you at least look at the article or do a little searching before claiming it's non-notable? — brighterorange (talk) 21:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - is there some secret reason for this nominate I can't gather?WilyD 21:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• A keep with a moat around it and guard towers - There should be crocodiles in the moat, too. --Dch111 22:22, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep. Very unconsidered nomation considering the huge popularity and previous hype around the subject. Whilding87 23:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep per discussions above. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 00:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep as above. Seriously, this is a joke right? --Scottie theNerd 01:25, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I hope so, because the user doesn't even begin to describe why it's "non-notable." The user attempted this very weakly. And
    look, he's a Gaia Online user :P Seicer (talk) (contribs) 04:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • There are millions of gaia online users (OK, fine, there are millions of accounts. There are almost certainly at least hundreds of thousands of users, though) - I've never said anything about
      Random832^T 05:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      • That's not an 'ad-homiem' attack, so please do not make statements such as that that cannot be verified. Note that I added a ':P' to the text, and as a user of Habbo Hotel, there are some nice gags that go on towards players of Gaia Online. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 05:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • :P isn't exactly clear in meaning among emoticons - i've always thought it implied derision [i.e. it would _enhance_ the perception that you're saying "since you're a gaia online user, you must be biased against habbo hotel" or whatever you were trying to imply] --
          Random832^T 06:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply
          ]
      • Please see Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Stating a Wikipedia policy is not sufficient; a good argument (and therefore a good nomination) would outline why the article is against quoted policies. What may be obviously "non-notable" to you may not be clear to anyone else. --Scottie theNerd 06:54, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep: baseless nomination. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 05:04, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep Clearly notable. Maxamegalon2000 06:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep per Zagalejo —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 07:04, 20 January 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.