Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Despair.com


 * 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: Deleted. --Aphaia 22:20, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Despair.com
Blatant advertising (the site sells various parphanelia with these parodies). MosheZadka 13:48, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * VOTE CLOSED: Deleted (4 deleted, no dissent). --Aphaia 22:20, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete MosheZadka 13:48, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This reads more like a stub of a Wikipedia article, and is a shill for a new book, as MosheZadka says. The book "even features a valid ISBN barcode, which virtually assures its quality". If and when this book actually becomes available outside corporate seminars (like on Amazon, where it currently isn't) and someone without a commercial interest actually provides some quotes, it might make a useful article. &mdash; Jeff Q (talk) 14:07, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Slight amendment to above: if the book, The Art of Demotivation, becomes available, that might make a useful topic for an article. An article titled "Despair.com" doesn't strike me as useful in any case. &mdash; Jeff Q (talk) 14:43, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete I blanked it (for reviewing, you can read it from history). In my opinion advertisement could be a speedy candidate. --Aphaia 16:32, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Advert for a non-notable website. jni 06:24, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: I've reverted the blanking of the article. VfD exists to allow the community to judge an article; people shouldn't have to examine the history to do so. This isn't obvious spam, which would make it speedy-deletable; it merely provides an un-Wikiquote-like description of something with virtually no quotes and provides an inappropriate commercial link. In my opinion, it should have the same right to be reviewed as a potential copyvio or other questionable material. &mdash; Jeff Q (talk) 11:05, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: it could be another topic of our "VfD improvement initiatives"... Further information on WQ:VP.


 * 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.