Vero - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xball
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Rossami (talk) 00:35, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Vanity. The site provided in the official link says the game was invented two weeks ago. Admittedly interesting, but far from notable. --InShaneee 16:22, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Comments by author 81.101.7.207 copied from article:
There have aparently been concerns from some Wikipedia users that this game is only two weeks old, and is thus not rleveant enougth to be posted on Wikipedia and should be deleted, this is in fact wrong, the game may be new but it has take Brighton by storm, thir are at least three coleges in Brighton that so far ave had competitions in the game, and there are scores of people who adore the game. one of the points of this article is to inform, the whole point of an encyclopedia, and thus we wer tryign to inform the world of Xball...plz don't delete it
- Delete. Original research, not notable, almost reads like an advert. jni 16:45, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- A three-week old game that is taking the University of Brighton by storm, eh? It has no takers in the English department yet, though, apparently. Delete. If you want to promote something new, publish an article on your own website. Wikipedia is not a publicity vehicle. Uncle G 19:09, 2005 Jan 25 (UTC)
- Delete. Advert for a local fad. — Gwalla | Talk 19:43, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. It takes more than three weeks to establish a new sport. Furthermore, since it is so brand spanking new, it would make any article original research, and therefore not eligible for Wikipedia. Come back to us when you've got it in the news (and a proper part of the news, not a space filling article in some local rag). Average Earthman 23:57, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Interesting, but too new. Delete. -- Scott eiπ + 1 = 0 00:25, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Mikkalai
- Delete. It isn't a well-known game. The whole article is an attempt to draw attention to the author (?). There was a link to the article (which I removed) in the Pool ambiguation page, which just shows the attention seeking. Pink-isnt-well
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.