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. The article does establish notability as reliable sources have been found. (non-administrative closure) -- RyRy (talk) 02:13, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stupidedia[edit]

Stupidedia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable web site, does not pass WP:WEB requirements. Ecoleetage (talk) 00:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep. Sure it does, it just isn't properly sourced at the moment. Stupidedia lists articles about itself on serveral reliable sources, all in German. Google gives 115,000 hits. --Amalthea (talk) 00:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:Stupidedia where the author says just that in response to the CSD, and lists wikilinks to some of the reliable sources, among them the german newspapers with the highest circulations. --Amalthea (talk) 00:18, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It already has a listing on the German side of Wikipedia, which does provide references as to its notability. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stupidedia Is there a reason for a German-languange site to be listed seperately on the English-language side of wikipedia?Khanaris (talk) 00:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Featured in a Bild article titled Knowledge the world doesn't need ([1]). --Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 01:19, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Actually, a lot of the coverage provided by the article's author is extremely brief. These are minor mentions, not significant coverage. Ecoleetage (talk) 01:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree that a lot of them are very brief or mention the site only as a "reference" themselves, but I'm convinced that there's enough to make it notable by far: There are at least two with significant coverages, [2] (Bild) and [3] (Rheinische_Post), and a number of "web tips": [4] on de:GIGA Digital Television, a German genre TV channel, [5] [6] on Bild, [7] on Oberösterreichische Rundschau, [8] on de:PC Games, a german PC games magazine, and [9] on CHIP (magazine).
--Amalthea (talk) 07:44, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep it. In Germany, Stupipedia is well-known. --Olahus (talk) 18:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• (At least weak) Keep I also found a mention in Die Welt [10], but with all the other minor mentions, I don't know if this establishes sufficient notability. – sgeureka ^t•c 22:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep - Seems to be notable enough. Ostap 00:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep - Even if the article has little or no context, it may be expanded, cleaned up, and be nominated into an A or B-class article by a great editor who's bold. --Ωfrogger3140Ω (talk) 17:54, 17 July 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.