Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Mushroom Kingdom

Add links
From 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 of the debate was Redirect

After several recounts I think we can acertain about 5 merge votes, 5 non-puppet keeps, and 39 deletes. Even though this rules that it should be deleted it has already been redirected to Mushroom Kingdom (noting lack of "The"). This is a harmless redirect so closing as "Decision was to Delete, but already Redirected." Of course if someone wants to go ahead and delete it anyway feel free. GarrettTalk 02:59, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Mushroom Kingdom[edit]

It looks like non-notable vanity of a fansite, but it's hard to discern the facts from the language it uses. Therefore, I have nominated this to decide. Paply 9 July 2005 08:27 (UTC)

  • I was just going to put it up for speedy delete. Having recieved a threatening comment on my talk page as a result of this, I strongly reiterate that this article should be deleted. ~~~~ 9 July 2005 08:29 (UTC)
  • Abstain. Sandy M 9 July 2005 09:05 (UTC)
  • Keep. It may not be all too well-written and way too short, but it is a popular, well-known site that can provide information for the page easily. -- A Link to the Past July 9, 2005 09:10 (UTC)
  • Keep. Are you people are morons? I just read about this in our chatroom. We are the coolest and bestest Mario website on the net. Only idiots and morons would say to "speedy delete" our site. If voting is how we get to keep this article, then I'll definitely be asking all our chat regulars to vote keep on this. I hope I never have to come to this horrid place again. I find it highly insulting that you people have the audacity to judge our site. Tooraj 9 July 2005 15:03 (UTC)
  • This user's only edit.-Splash 9 July 2005 15:46 (UTC)
Yes, but if we kept on that criteria or the vote was modified that way, then it would violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and sockpuppeteering guidelines. Insulting? I SPIT on your website. Delete. -- Natalinasmpf 07:38, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I have 4733 edits. [1] -- Natalinasmpf 07:53, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Hi, our chatroom was discussing this. I was told to vote keep on this and I get entered in a lottery to win possible mod status on the channel. Well, wish me luck on winning. Hey, Tooraj when will the drawing end? Ramin X 9 July 2005 15:16 (UTC)
  • This user's first edit. -Splash 9 July 2005 15:46 (UTC)
  • That is nice, but you should add something meaningful to the discussion particularly as it relates to how encyclopedic the article is as this is potentially weighed most heavily around here in determining the outcome rather than just the raw count of Keep or Delete, as votes are not necessarily treated as numerical. Please explain why you believe the article should be kept other than that you are a member of a community or chatroom specific to the site featured. --Mysidia 9 July 2005 15:40 (UTC)
  • Your forum misunderstands the procedures of Wikipedia. This page makes clear that admins can and will discount votes of brand new users . This is uniformly done in such clear cases of new users coming along specifically to support/oppose a particular page. Even if your keep votes overwhelm the delete votes, it will still go if you are all brand new, or fairly new users (or anon IP addresses) with such a clear agenda. You would do better to spend your time establishing the notability of your forum in the article in legitimate ways. -Splash 9 July 2005 15:46 (UTC)
  • Delete and Redirect to Mushroom Kingdom - This looks like vanity/self-promotion/spam. 11,100,000 internet references to IMDB, V.S. 5,750 to this site in google. It does not appear that, and I do not believe that the Mushroom Kingdom is anywhere near the level of notability or utility of IMDB, which is a large project of broad scope and broad recognition, and I believe that the article overstates the importance of the site: even if it were true in a limited scope, the comparison hurts the article, because the web site. Mario is notable and encyclopedic, but in general, there may be many fansites, but they are not notable, and I have visited many Mario-related websites and sites which document or list Mario games in the past, but never this one. The Mario equivalent to IMDB is just IGN, Gamespot, et al, note that those are considered notable enough sites and do have articles. --Mysidia 9 July 2005 15:33 (UTC)
    • The article makes this specific claim "Recently, it was the crown feature among the multitudes of booths in E3 and G4." It seems doubtful, I have checked E3's list of exhibitioners and been unable to find any listing for TMK, is there somewhere else that should be checked before concluding that this claim is probably not so? --Mysidia 9 July 2005 16:27 (UTC)
  • Delete. Fansites have a very high bar to clear to be encyclopedic. Give them an external link on the Mario Brothers page, but no article. And this "lottery" of newbies voting won't help either. Your votes won't be counted so don't bother; you'll just piss us off and garner more dlete votes. -R. fiend 9 July 2005 15:37 (UTC)
    • By the way, The Mushroom Kingdom already has external links from several of the Mario-related articles on Wikipedia, and I agree, that is fine, TMK has content that merits linking from those articles, even if the site is not noted widely enough to merit a separate article on it. --Mysidia 03:57, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thank you for that endorsement. To all TMK members: You heard that ringing endorsement, so it's a giant free for all. If it's Mario related, add our site to it. Remember, try to get every article that is remotely related Mario linking to our site. We want all this site's Mario-related articles linking to our site. The deadline for the second lottery will even be extended for two months to make sure we get every Mario related article linked to our site. Tigerz 04:45, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • Is there a place that keeps track of how many each person has? I need to see how much more I need to do. T Omidi 05:08, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete nn forum, being supported by sock/meat puppets. -Splash 9 July 2005 15:46 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not encyclopedic.
(this was added by Blu Aardvark; forgot to sign diff)
  • Delete per R. fiend -Harmil 9 July 2005 15:59 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Mushroom Kingdom. And this should be counted as a delete if it comes down to arguing about counting. I want it gone, I just think the redirect would be minorly helpful. -- Cyrius|✎ 9 July 2005 17:33 (UTC)
  • Strong delete, non-notable website plus outrageous abuse. Dcarrano July 9, 2005 17:50 (UTC)
    • It's NOT vanity. Can you come up with a better Mario site? -- A Link to the Past July 9, 2005 18:41 (UTC)
    • Forgot to mention that when I searched for "Mushroom Kingdom", the site was the most frequently visited. It is definitely both notable and not vanity. -- A Link to the Past July 9, 2005 18:41 (UTC)
Can you come up with a worse logical fallacy? You're making a circular argument. You fail. -- Natalinasmpf 07:52, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've heard of this site, I go there occasionally, I've posted on the forums, in the mailbag, and in the chatroom. However, it's merely an ephemeral fansite that's neither encyclopedic nor notable. Redirect to Mushroom Kingdom. Andre (talk) July 9, 2005 18:52 (UTC)
  • Keep. Our site was the "crown jewel". I doubt anyone would want to remove the "crown jewel" of anything. T Omidi 22:30, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Please post my vote for me. I don't want to waste time on that wiki-whatever The Real Phunk
  • Keep. A very in-depth source of arcane Mario information. Our episode guides rivals and is even better than TVTome. Abn12
  • Keep. It's the very BEST Mario site in the world. Heche3
  • Keep. From what I've heard, this topic definitely belongs on Wikipedia.Arthur78
  • Keep. Servbot20
  • Keep. We rule. Twin Queen
  • Keep. I've posted some of the above votes from people in our chatroom since they wanted to enter the lottery, but not waste time coming here making an account and posting. Also, I'm voting keep too. I might as well enter too. Boco III 22:52, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just in case "Boco" didn't make it clear, he indeed posted seven keep votes. They still count as zero though. -R. fiend 23:06, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. You guys know that the lottery prize will only be awarded if the article survives, right? I don't think this "discounting" stuff is just a scare tactic, what if they actually discount votes? Well, at least I'll try to make an effort to save this article. To reiterate some of the arguments in keeping our article - we are notable and not "vanity". Our website is the first site to be listed on Google when you search for "Mushroom Kingdom". That should be good enough because security is important to Google, not even the atom bomb can skew its results. Any site that shows up as the first listing on Google deserves an article on your Wikipedia. Also, we have very unique content that other sites don't have. For example, compare our cartoon episode guide with the one found on TVTome. When you compare the two, you will definitely see that we are the superior guide. I bet my total manhood that nobody that can counter these points. There, that should get me at least ten extra entries into the lottery, pretty please. Tigerz 23:24, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Equivalent to IMDB. 'nuff said. Youngblood 23:35, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - It is pretty clearly a vanity page --InformationalAnarchist 23:38, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and replace with a redirect to Mushroom Kingdom. As this is a subdomain, it has no clear Alexa data; the entire parent site, of which this is a very small part, is ranked at 17,254. 262 displayed google hits for the address and 119 incoming links don't argue for notability. —Cryptic (talk) 00:17, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not merely is there an attack of sockpuppets, but lazy sockpuppets. And it IS vanity: group vanity as opposed to individual vanity, but vanity nonetheless. --Calton | Talk 01:01, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Why are the people here so dense that they don't understand our site's impact on the Mario universe. When people think of movies, they instantly think of IMDB. When people think of Mario, they instantly think of our wonderful website. You people just probably need to be laid or something... Vadir 01:09, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • You run a fansite devoted to a Nintendo game, and we're the ones who need to get laid? Wow. -R. fiend 01:41, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Eh, whatever, I don't care. If this gets deleted, then I'll just try my chances with the second lottery. At least with the second lottery, I don't have to deal with your crap anymore. Vadir 02:51, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • Comment: R. fiend's above retort deserves some kind of a prize - at the very least, it shall be immortalized in BJAODN. -- BD2412 talk 04:55, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • To other editors:Please don't use the vanity refrain, it's inaccurate and a nuisance accusation.

To TMK users welcome to Wikipedia. From looking over the site it looks frequently updated and visited by a regular crowd. Your site may be of significant value for those looking for information related to the topic, but Wikipedia has a threshold of inclusion that is not yet satisfied. Real world or virtual, no matter what, Wikipedia seeks entries on topics that are verifiable (i.e. Externally commented upon). We maintain this standard to help preserve the integrity of information. If the article is made of original research then only insiders will be able to work on it. At its foundation, Wikipedia fuctions by the ability of visitors to verify and challenge the info published. I hope you understand why we editors seek to remove this entry.

Regards, lots of issues | leave me a message 00:55, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I find it ridiculous people are challenging very basic information. What dummy would challenge that a chicken's egg yolk is yellow, or that 1 + 1 = 2, or that humans breathe oxygen. Challenging that The Mushroom Kingdom's status equivalence to IMDB is the epitome of idiocy. We are the first site listed in Google for "Mushroom Kingdom", this empirically proves the equivalence 100% Vadir 01:33, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, the entry asserts only basic claims, and the Google evidence convincingly verifies the site's coverage as comprehensive, however, there is no mechanism by which Wikipedia can approve of only limited development of an entry. If editors agree to keep this entry, then like all other entries, there is the expectation it should eventually be expanded out of stub status, which will undoubtedly spill insider knowledge into the article. Against the Wikipedia inclusion standard this is a largely unverifiable subject matter.
And - This is just an online encyclopedia - there's no great value in being an article and there's no need to equate removal as an insult to your site's pride.
Regards, lots of issues | leave me a message 02:14, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fancruftcruft. -guety is talking english bad 01:53, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. What can I say that hasn't already been said with more eloquence? Well, let's try this...: You're #1 on Google? OK then, let's do a test. Mushroom Kingdom : 670,000 Googles. Golden Axe : 751,000 Googles. Now according to those stats alone (alone, mind), that would make "Death Adder's Castle" the "more popular" site than yours because it beats back a greater number of other hits to become the #1. But does that mean it's deserving of an article here? Of course not! And another test, let's try Mario. Are you on the first search page? Nope! Try Zelda. Is there a fansite on the first page? Yep, Zelda Universe. Does that mean they deserve an article here? NO! Now look, I'm sure your fansite is awesome, and complete, and detailed, and the bees-knees of Mario... but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of knowledge, not a directory of cool. And as for this tactic of offering adminship to encourage flood voting, I am shocked. You are completely perverting the purpose of our Vfd system, that is that unbiased people vote based on their will to make Wikipedia a better place and uphold our high standards, not provide votes that basically boil down to "OMG dey gonna delet my favrite site ONO!!!11!! Keep keep keep it u bastids!!1!" GarrettTalk 02:16, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • It doesn't matter if you removed it or not (referring to the previous edit). It's already been spread through our chat room, also if this loses the winner of the new lottery can choose channel mod instead of forum mod if they want. Tigerz 02:47, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Do we get any "increased chance" of winning the second lottery for past actions? My friend User:Eclipsed Moon added some already and are still present in some of the articles. Or does each link need to be a different account? I do see why it needs to be a different account, but can she get some "bonus" in the lottery because some of the links are still there. Or does she need to start over? Anyways, if not, at least this second lottery is much better than the first one. Whoever came up with the first lottery needs to be silenced for a week. :P Sandy M 03:08, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, my reply was removed. However, she was still able to get her answer via our chat room. Too bad you aren't a mod there. lol Tigerz 03:30, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Folks, please find something else to do. Because of the nature of your planned linking (retaliatory action against Wikipedia) we will be reverting links. Consider how minor this squabble is - it's just an online encyclopedia.
To other editors:The outcome of this vote is clear, please don't escalate with any new barbs.

lots of issues | leave me a message 02:53, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete vanity/self-promotion. --Etacar11 03:28, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is adding the link to Nintendo countable? Nintendo and Mario are synonymous with most non-gamers. Inker 8 04:37, 10 July 2005 (UTC) Never mind. I'll ask my questions in the chat room. Inker 8 04:38, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Fancruft and vanity. Is non-notable. And frankly, as a sidenote, I think that their idea of lotteries to get non-Wikipedia members to vote for keeping this article is ridiculous, and should immediately cause the article's deletion. That said, I have thought of Mario games many times, and I have never associated it with your website. Sorry. -- CABHAN TALK CONTRIBS 04:50, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I want to be a channel mod if I win the second lottery. Angel XXX 04:52, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Elfguy 05:09, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete it before it spreads. Gentgeen 05:19, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete vanity. K1Bond007 05:20, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • To anyone even thinking of trying to claim the prize - Don't bother. You'll be mercilessly hunted down, blocked and have all your edits reverted before you can say omgmoderatorship. It'll just be a gigantic waste of your time and a small waste of ours. I repeat: Anyone linkspamming TMK will be summarily blocked and reverted without warning. --FCYTravis 05:23, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unnotable website with enemies that troll Wikipedia. People that created article and put it on VfD are both newbies that somehow know to type {{vfd}}. These trolls are even less notable than GNAA. — Olathe 05:29, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, redirect, and protect. The site news looks to be updated about twice a week, and the forums only have 3100 users. Since the site doesn't have its own domain, Alexa rank is impossible to determine, but Google only lists maybe 100 inbound links. --Carnildo 05:36, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not noteworthy and vanity. DarthVader 05:39, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, redirect to Mushroom Kingdom, and protect. This is the first time I've been strongly in favor of deleting or keeping an article that doesn't seem to be a "duh" issue. Well, it's still a "duh" one for me, anyway. Toothpaste 05:43, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not a particularly noteworthy community of spammers. - Vague | Rant 05:47, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, redirect and kill all sockpuppets. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 06:23, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and redirect per Cyrius. Sockpuppets never win. This is hopeless vanity. Xoloz 06:35, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete When I think of Mario, I immediately think of... playing a videogame. I definately do NOT think about some crappy fansite. --Measure 06:47, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Why not? --Phred Levi 06:56, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It's a nice site, and an article on it wouldn't hurt....Would it? Vidgmchtr 07:01, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete even though the guidelines for websites/forums/fansites are vague at best this site doesn't seem to meet the criteria for notability, also the massive dummy votes for keep by the forum users and their alleged contest to try to keep spam this topic doesn't convince me that this website is more than a place for anything more serious than pointless contests.Jtkiefer 07:12, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
Amend Also amend a protect to the vote since page is at high risk for recreation if deleted. Jtkiefer 07:21, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

Guys, you need to use your heads. Apparently, I found a loophole. They won't remove the link if it was already there. Ha ha ha. I'm getting the modship. Oh, and Eclipsed I can't wait to silence you for two weeks. lol. While you're all adding your one link a day or every 12 hours, or whatever hoping nobody will notice, I've already got several links that are untouchable. I am da man. Yeah! Only a genius could have figured out something this unremovable and untouchable loophole. Bow down to my leet genius. Cool Jared 07:27, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nice try Jared, but all of your additions, except to this page, have been reverted. Dare I say, Pwnage? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 07:40, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've redirected the page speedily in the hopes that we can close this particular strange chapter in VfD history. Vandals are learning how to play the system, it appears. The page in question was created by User:Leger and then VfD'd one minute later by User:Paply. Perhaps we can find out if they were using the same IP... it increasingly appears this page was created and VfD'd in an attempt to discredit the forum in question. --FCYTravis 07:44, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge "Give them an external link on the Mario Brothers page" -- sounds about right to me. And maybe part of a sentence describing the major mario fansites out there. +sj + 07:46, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, who know whats goniong on with this vfd, regardless the forum in question is not a notable website.--nixie 07:50, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I'm the owner of The Mushroom Kingdom website, IRC channel, and message boards. I did not endorse this article about my site, so I must vote in favor of deletion. Talk of "spamming links" in order to "become a mod" is nonsense, because only TMK staff get operator status in the chatroom. In addition, I do not recognize any users posting on this VFD except for Phred and Vid. It appears to me that some people who don't like our website are causing a ruckus, hoping to get every link to our website removed from Wikipedia. And, yes, I created an account just to tell my side of this truly bizarre story. Deezer 08:02, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • The links were being added for the contest people mentioned, from your site, were running. Because of that, people added links to various pages, which we consider link spamming. That was why we removed them all except for this article. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 08:05, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Seriously, I put every damned link up, a while before this page was an issue. It's no more spam than IMDB; I'm just putting up relative page links up. People don't do it, I do it. I know nothing about Deezer, other than the fact that he's working on Paper Mario TTYD Mariopedia information. I've no reason to spam, because I'm not even a member. I'm being bold (I believe that's a Wikipedia guideline), and adding them because I feel them relevant to the page. I don't wanna be a mod on TMK; I'm not even that big of a Mario fan. I'm more for the Nippon Ichi games (Disgaea being one of them), Zelda and Kirby. No bias coming from me. -- A Link to the Past 08:22, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
      • No such contest was ever held, sponsored, or endorsed by TMK. I seriously have no idea where this idea came from. (From the assistant webmaster of TMK). --MegaByte 16:02, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Mushroom Kingdom. I do not object to deletion. <>Who?¿? 08:21, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete but keep the link on the relevant mario page(s) only, not on every page that mentions the mario series. The google argument is just dumb: my site just lo fi comes up first (without quotes!) on google but there's no article on it, and there won't be any time soon. - Matthew Cieplak (talk) (edits) 09:17, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I would consider keeping it if the users didnt keep making sockpuppets and voting here over and over. I just crossed all their votes out. :-/ They're worse than GNAA. Redwolf24 09:24, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • question: should the history be wiped? I mean, this isn't a merge like most redirections, nothing from the article except the URL has remained, and that would certainly slow recreation/reversion as they'd have to make the article from scratch. Just a thought. GarrettTalk 12:49, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, Nonnoteworthy fan forum. carmeld1 06:46, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete non notable forumcruft. JamesBurns 07:13, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - one of the thousands of webforums, apparent vandalism, poster child for speedy deletion procedure update - Skysmith 12:05, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect. I don't object to a deletion either. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:37, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Possibly redirect afterwards. Possibly protect given the horde of socks here. Radiant_>|< 11:23, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete and Redirect to Mushroom Kingdom. — Asbestos | Talk 16:00, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Kiand 17:35, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Non-notable forum with members attempting to spam links. Besides, it's pretty easy to tell how spammed the link looks when it opens up to a splash screen homepage, rather than a page on the article's particular Mario/Nintendo topic. Ruby Queen 04:10, 15 July 2005 (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/The_Mushroom_Kingdom&oldid=1116831780"