Talk:WikipediaVision

This article was nominated for deletion on 30 December 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Wikipedia Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Wikipedia.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Websites: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Internet culture Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture 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.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Website "flickrvision"

There is a similar process at flickrvision. -- Wavelength (talk) 06:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

Regarding the deletion debate, I meant to comment but was too busy to get it in before the discussion was closed and archived. The keep result was based on comments such as:

Keep Sources found, coverages proves it notable. Dream Focus 9:54 pm, 5 January 2010, last Tuesday (3 days ago) (UTC−8)
Keep - yes, the site has received coverage from reputable sources. - Richard Cavell (talk)

To which I say, so what? Just because reputable sources cover does not necessarily prove it to be notable. Did it not occur to anybody that reputable sources may write about unremarkable, unnotable things? Whether it be to fulfill a quota or just to fill space or pages in a technology column or whatever the reason, my point is this web site is still not notable enough to warrant an encyclopedic article and it being covered by reliable sources does not necessarily make it notable. I realize this argument is at the heart of the "inclusionism vs. deletionism" debate and I'm not trying to bring that up nor am I deletionist, I just wanted to get my point across but was unable to because the discussion was closed, regardless I accept the result. -- œ ^™ 12:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re-added the notability flag. I agree with the above. Just because someone can find one article somewhere on it, doesn't mean that it's notable. The fact that they all the articles are clustered around Nov 1, 2007 and nothing can be found later proves that site was never especially noteworthy. This should be deleted. 69.28.149.29 (talk) 21:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]