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. BJ^Talk 00:26, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Informed Consent (website)[edit]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: ((subst:spa|username)); suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)); accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)).

Non-notable website. Barely asserts significance and there is nothing to confirm it. Most of the content is not sourced, with the only ref being to an article in the Midlands Fetish Scene dating from May 2005. Not the subject of multiple non-trivial published works, no well-known awards claimed, no independent distribution - therefore fails WP:WEB. WJBscribe (talk) 13:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep. Although the article needs cleanup (which I'll do when I have the time) this isn't a "two guys in a shed" operation but probably the leading website on BDSM and related issues in the UK, and is cited as such by multiple reliable sources, from The Dubliner to the Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, and was a nominee in this year's New Statesman New Media Awards. – iride scent 15:24, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. Let's see what – iride scent comes up with. WikiScrubber (talk) 05:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. There are a lot of people who research sexuality on the internet, and Wikipedia is one of the first ports of call for information. Having a link to another information-offering site (rather than one of the vast number of dating sites) is a real help, and an invaluable resource. - CrystalEyesCry (talk) 11:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. I agree with CrystalEyesCry. - Am i noddy? (talk) 13:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC)am i noddy?— Am i noddy? (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Strong Keep. This is the main site for the BDSM community in Britain. It is of vital importance for researchers and other people seeking information. I feel that the only reason it finds itself on here is one of moral disapproval, which is dangerous ground for something which purports to be an encyclopaedia. Certainly, if this site no longer has an entry here, then it will compromise the usefulness of the Wikipedia, and word will soon get about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prunesquallor on ic (talk • contribs) 14:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC) — Prunesquallor on ic (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete The informed consent webiste is not particularly notable in any way. It is not primarily an information resource, it is a collection of blogs, profiles and forums. There are far bigger sites of similar make up, with a far greater international basis of members and contributors. It is rarely, if ever reffered to in media outside the web, and it seems most of its references on the web come from its own members. It claims 126k profiles, but not even 5% seem to be regular visitors (visiting once per day, even if not to contribute), let alone contributors to the site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skepticalcynic (talk • contribs) 15:33, 5 September 2008 (UTC) — Skepticalcynic (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Strong Keep - As has been said, this is the main site for the BDSM community in Britain.

As it happens, three days ago, I posted on IC "But what it (IC) seems to have over and above all the other sites is that it is a major thread in the fabric of the UK's Bdsm/Fetish Scene: every Fair, Market, Event, Party, Group and Club is represented, promoted, discussed, deconstructed and critiqued here."

IC might rarely be referred to in the Media, as a preceding contributor has alleged, but it is often quoted without the courtesy of a credit!—Preceding unsigned comment added by The Dominant Vicar (talk • contribs) 17:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC) — The Dominant Vicar (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete. I couldn't find any reliable sources. Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:14, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Type "BDSM" into Google and IC comes up as the second entry behind Wiki itself. Surely a site with that level of conectiveness, to register that high in a google search, deserves a mention? Although one could argue that a site that is that well known hardly needs an entry in wikipedia. Donsayers (talk) 22:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)— Donsayers (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete. It does fail the guidelines set by Wikipedia. Just because its an allegedly well known site does not mean that it has to be in here. There are no credible sources to link to it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cloudbusta (talk • contribs) 22:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC) — Cloudbusta (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Delete. It simply doesn't match Wiki criteria Demondriver (talk) 08:17, 6 September 2008 (UTC) — Demondriver (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [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.