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 delete. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Little Green Footballs awards[edit]

This is a list describing "awards" given by Little Green Footballs, a politically extremist blog, to various individuals. No reliable, third-party sources are cited, so this list fails verifiability requirements. Furthermore, the "c" section is in violation of the BLP policy, since its only purpose is to repeat criticisms that were never published in reliable sources. I don't see any reason to believe that this will ever be a valid encyclopedia article and I think it should be deleted. *** Crotalus *** 13:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: The fact that Little Green Footballs is extremist is irrelevant. Your analysis of the “Fiskie” rejects the assumption of good faith. Can you defend that rejection? Certainly reporting that one party made a claim about another is very different from reporting that claim itself as fact. —SlamDiego_←T 19:08, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Please read the official Wikipedia policy on verifiability. It says, "If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it." There is no reliable, third-party source on the Little Green Footballs awards. Therefore, we should not have an article on them. *** Crotalus *** 21:23, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - My comment did not concern verifiability. It concerned the relevance of your description of the site as extremist, and your employment of an argument that rejected the assumption of good faith. You cannot address these concerns by invoking verifiability. —SlamDiego_←T 22:18, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - The description of the website is irrelevant to the AfD. I say Delete either way. Fails WP:N. --Roehl Sybing (talk) 23:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The only references which come up in a Google search on this topic ([1]) are a handful of blog posts, many of which seem to have been cross posted from the Little Green Footballs blog. As such, I don't see how these awards pass WP:NOTE ("A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject"). I agree with the WP:BLP concerns raised by the nominating editor and don't think that any of the content should be merged into the Little Green Footballs article. --Nick Dowling (talk) 22:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No indication of notability. —SlamDiego_←T 23:05, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep.This is a prize on an internet site which attracts hundreds of thousands of visitors. The prize itself is decided by voting by tens of thousands of registered users. I think anything that manages to attract that kind of attention lives up to a criteria on notability – regardless of what wiki paragraph someone can cite. But do what you want. I’ve largely lost interest in the English wiki. Too many petty bureaucrats who thinks citing obscure paragraphs is more important than common sense or trying to form an clear argument of their own. Rune X2 (talk) 14:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete For reasons clearly expressed by Crotalus, above. smb (talk) 15:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - blatantly non-notable; can't even incorporate information into the main LGF article, for obvious BLP reasons already explained. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:24, 30 January 2008 (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.