Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Megaphone desktop tool

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman (talk) 11:39, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Megaphone desktop tool

Megaphone desktop tool (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not a notable piece of software or website. The organization that runs it (GIYUS) is also not notable. Most references to either Megaphone Desktop or GIYUS seem to be from radical anti-Israel and anti-Semetic websites, with the exception of a few mentions in the pro-Israel website,

Honest Reporting.Yserbius (talk) 21:20, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Questions to nom: Could you expand on "radical anti-Israel websites" being non RS? Thus written it reads like OR. And if some source is "anti-Semitic", why is it still in the article? To me, not a base for AfD, more like an edit, isn't it? Then, when these sources are so poor, why did you remove other sources like GIYUS-about us, JPost, and The Register here? -DePiep (talk) 22:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Re:Questions: I noticed Megaphone popping up in discussions about the Israel/Palestinian conflict, always by users calling Israel supporters "Megaphoners". I check Israeli news websites regularly so it intrigued me that I never heard of it. A simple Google search showed that virtually the only hits were either forums like Yahoo Answers and conspiracy sites like Stormfront.org and Electronic Intifada. These sites are very much non-RS as they can take a small, not very notable idea or person and make them seem important. They have been pushing Megaphone as a reason why there is support for Israel on the web, despite there being little to no evidence of its usage. Yserbius (talk) 03:48, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
1. Wait, you are referring to non RS that are not used in the article. That says (you say) Wikipedia does it right. Here is no argument for deletion at all.
2. Then, elsewhere (I linked to) you deleted Megaphone and good sources like JPost, The Review, and just left The Sunday Times reference, in a vacuum. However, here in your nominating post and later in this answer again, you state that you cannot find a reasonable hit using Google.
3. Together: you delete RS elsewhere, and fifteen minutes later you write here you can't find a RS (and I'll skip the OR for now). Since you contradict your own statement, your nom's rationale is empty & idle. -DePiep (talk) 08:23, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
1. I apologize. I'm still new to Wikipedia, as you may be able to tell from my profile. The problem is that of the RS's in the article only four actually mention Megaphone by name, the JPost article (which the link was broken) two Guardian articles and one from the Register. The rest refer to Israels efforts to increase positive standing in Internet communities, which is relevant, but only tangentically, as there is still no RS that Megaphone is even endorsed by Israel, let alone run by them.
2. I mentioned that I could not find a reliable source before I saw the fixed JPost link. I still could not find anything useful via Google. I deleted the JPost because the link was broken and I did not see anything by the Review, can you please point out to me what citation that was? There was a few other refs that I removed because they were very much non-RS.
3. I should have been a little more careful with editing that article. Basically, the problem was that the article implied that Megaphone is Israels #1 Internet weapon, when in reality it's a barely noticeable website. The citations provided over there were either irrelevant or broken, so I simply removed all references to Megaphone and left it as a simple paragraph about Israels well known and well reported brigade to ramp up support online.
My Conclusions: Yes, there exists a tool called 'Megaphone Desktop Tool' and it is mentioned once or twice in reliable sources. It's usage and effectiveness, though, is very exaggerated thanks in part to anti-Israel websites. Also, it has nothing to do with the Israeli government, only one or two forgettable pro-Israel organizations. Although Israel does have an Internet campaign, Megaphone has nothing to do with it. It is a silly website, made in the spare time of a few small time Israel supporters and is rarely updated (you can check the list feed yourself, it's updated less than twice a month and never with sites that involve voting). I recently found out about Wikis deletion policies, and was looking at the list of deleted articles, (specifically, those about software and websites) and this looked like a prime example of something that should not have its own article. If I am wrong, please feel free to chime in, but despite everything, I still feel that this entire article needs to be migrated to a paragraph or two in Israel_lobby_in_the_United_States#Media_and_public_discourse. Yserbius (talk) 14:51, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The JPost article above makes it clear that the tool is endorsed by Israel's Foreign Ministry. To reiterate, my suggestion is that the topic be more about Internet propaganda than about this specific tool. It is the use and endorsement (by the Israeli government) of the tool that makes it notable. — HowardBGolden (talk) 15:54, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
HBG's reply should do. But after your "apology" (please, stop explaining yourself. I have read your texts. And your so called conclusion, non sequitur, is: back to the same old personalized OR), after this, you still tried to push your POV again in here (I reverted, having read and referencing to your contributions here). Oh, so you are "new" here? Please state that this is your first account.
HBG, I'm sorry I had to disturb your closing argument. Closing it was. Y's edit did it. -DePiep (talk) 21:24, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have put a note at Y's talk page. re newness and this AfD within 40 edits. -DePiep (talk) 21:44, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The JPost link was broken, thanks for fixing it. For something to be notable as an example of propaganda, there must be a reliable source that it's actually a notable tool. So far, the fact that there has been only cursory mentions about this tool, mostly by detractors, seems to imply that it is not widely used, if it is used at all. There are zero reliable sources that this is even endorsed by any major agency associated with Israel. GIYUS is practically non-existant and
WUJS can hardly be considered an agency with any power. I could also start up a website that promotes vote-bombing a random controversial topic, but that does not make it notable. The mention of it on the WUJS wiki page is enough, there doesn't need to be a wiki page just for Megaphone. Yserbius (talk) 03:48, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
Re renaming: indeed the construction "Megaphone (some disambiguation term)" is preferred per
WP:PRECISION and WP:DAB. The current word "desktop" is not very to the dab-point, as it is also web based. May I propose "Megaphone (software)"? Anyway, such a renaming is not an argument re this AfD. -DePiep (talk) 08:51, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
Re Yserbius: The JPost link was not only broken, it was also deleted by you based on OR in a bigger sweep (link again). Your "mostly by detractors" is personalised, very sloppy, and does not respond to the four RS HWB mentions. Did you check them? The whole reply reads like OR. Could you please start pointing to arguments? -DePiep (talk) 08:51, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Nom's arguments are OR intertwined with POV. Also, nom is contradicting their argument by behaving different (about 180 degrees) in other edit (i.e. deleting RSs on the same topic, links above). After two discussions, above, nom has not come to an improved argument. I myself cannot find a criteria for deletion. -DePiep (talk) 11:20, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Notable as a piece of political software endorsed by a government. Also spawned Collactive, a commercial version of the technology. --John Nagle (talk) 01:33, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The software is not notable in an engineering sense, but the social use of it certainly is, & there are sources to show it. That it has many sources mainly from "detractors" does not show it is not notable --quite the contrary. DGG ( talk ) 06:57, 5 October 2010 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Megaphone_desktop_tool&oldid=1069998929"