Talk:Nullarbor (demoparty)

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Redirect, 8 June 2024, see discussion.
keep, January 8, 2007, see discussion.

Australia: Western Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Nullarbor (demoparty) is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This redirect is supported by WikiProject Western Australia (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Western Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Video games

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Jackpot World (1 participant)
Bejeweled Stars (5 participants)
Melee (game terminology) (5 participants)
Godzilla: Monster of Monsters (4 participants; relisted)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (4 participants; relisted)
Crazy Bus (13 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Deletion

This article is quite valid in the eyes of some editors and does not need deleting on the grounds that the deletion was promoted - however there are issues raised in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nullarbor (demo party) which need to be addressed - please make comment there if you support retention of this article SatuSuro 01:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have unmarked the page for deletion based upon the above and also the simple fact that this is a good article that has to be there. It might need, as mentioned above, some extra content, but as can be seen from the history that has already been provided. As I mentioned in the history log: Some Wikipedians should concentrate more on adding new content than deleting new content. Jeroen Massar 10:38, 9 January 2007 (GMT)

I have reverted you. If you don't think the page should be deleted, say so on the AfD page. (Note, by the way, that I have voted the page be kept, so this is not part of a deletionist conspiracy). Hesperian 10:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE concentrating energies - there are in the realms of wikipedia a whole range of editors who 'gate keep' the encyclopedia from some of the most amazing vandalism and rubbish you could imagine - that comment does not pay respect to the fact that when this article when if first appeared (not in a sandbox but incrementally improved by a new user with no edit history) it appeared quite like the material that gets trashed daily by the gate keepers. It has only reached the current state because of a few editors and admins deciding to not support the initial justifiably deletionist move. Be grateful that some actually read 'around' the issue to find that some 'keep' support might be worth considering, otherwise it would have been gone ages ago :) SatuSuro 11:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]