Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vinismo

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 no consensus. Tim Song (talk) 02:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vinismo

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}}.

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete. Very thinly-sourced, one local media reference. I'm not sure this is terribly notable but would be glad to be proven wrong. — e. ripley\^talk 02:31, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- --Darkwind (talk) 05:05, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vinismo is becoming a recognized and reliable site for information about wines, a topic near and dear to many Wikipedians' hearts. There are not very many non-commercial sites to which one can refer on this topic. In fact at least 4 current Wikipedia pages link to Vinismo.com as sources for their content. Please see Sauvignon blanc, Mendoza Province, Yarra Valley and Marlborough Region. I had hoped that it would be possible to improve many other wine-related pages by having a {vinismo]] page here in Wikipedia. Gaiamei (talk) 17:31, 4 May 2010 (UTC)q[reply]
Vinismo is notable for being a Open Content wine guide. Beyond the merits of its content and its usefulness as a source for Wikipedia, it has value as a proof-of-concept for authoritative, collaborative, copyleft content. Maj (talk) 18:46, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Prior to this vote, last edit was in 2007. — e. ripley\^talk 17:54, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly support having a page about Vinismo here on Wikipedia. It is a very good site and I use it frequently. I like to know more about it. Please do not delete it. Thank you. Albert Albertmost (talk) 18:49, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Note, Albertmost (talk · contribs)'s first edit. Meatpuppets are discouraged here. — e. ripley\^talk 18:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vinismo is an OPEN and non-commercial wine resource. World famous? No, not yet. --ron k jeffries —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.225.71 (talk) 19:07, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Besides being the only open-content wine guide out there, Vinismo is notable specifically because it's the right place for many wiki articles about wine that don't belong on Wikipedia. See: Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_wine_guide I disagree with deleting this article. Zach (talk) 19:27, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At the risk of sounding rude (I don't mean to so I hope you will forgive me), did you end up here because of some sort of canvassing, Zcopley? I ask because prior to this, your last edit was in January. — e. ripley\^talk 19:32, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

E. Ripley: Does hearing that the page is up for deletion directly from a friend count as being canvased? Not sure why that's relevant. I was a bit baffled as to why the Vinismo page is up for deletion and wanted to voice my opinion that it should not be. I'm a light contributor to both Wikipedia and Vinismo (as well as other wikis) and it's an article I care about. Zach (talk) 20:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It does, in fact; take a look at WP:Canvassing. In this case it's inappropriate because someone is clearly recruiting people to come to this page to influence the vote tally toward the "keep" side. These AFD debates are supposed to be composed mostly of neutral parties evaluating an article on its merits. That being said, it's mostly just important to note for the closing admin. — e. ripley\^talk 02:57, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vinismo is notable project and I'm adding a couple more references to support this claim. Its important free culture resource, just like some other wikis out there that also provide a wealth of knowledge. Jon Phillips (talk) 20:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

undefined — No one has voted on this yet... moɳo 00:54, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. References meet our guidelines. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 04:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Montreal Gazette source, predating nomination. - BalthCat (talk) 06:09, 11 May 2010 (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.