Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ninja Strike Force
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. – Rich Farmbrough 16:38, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable subgroup of a contestably notable hacker group. In other words, vanity. Delete. --Sn0wflake 03:50, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. CDC themselves are noteworthy, largely because of the extremely popular Back Orifice program, but this subgroup isn't. Firebug 04:42, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Keep. I'm a member of cDc (we've done a lot more than BO, btw), though, so maybe that should be taken into account. --Myles Long 04:47, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)- I doubt it. The fact that you are a member of CULT OF THE DEAD COW doesn't seem relevant at all. The fact that CULT OF THE DEAD COW has done more than Back Orifice would be relevant were we discussing the CULT OF THE DEAD COW article. But we aren't. We're discussing Ninja Strike Force. Are you a member of Ninja Strike Force? Can you include in this article, which currently reads like a combined membership roster (Wikipedia is not a directory) and community noticeboard (Wikipedia is not a free hosting service), any reason that it is encyclopaedia-worthy? Remember that stuff that is too secret for Wikipedia won't help. Uncle G 11:21, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
- Yawn. No, I'm not a member of NSF, but I do have a vested interest in its well-being, that's all I meant. The NSF isn't a subgroup, either...it's more like a semi-autonomous collective under the cDc umbrella. But whatever. I didn't mean that cDc's having done more than BO was relevant to this discussion; I was merely responding to the previous "delete" vote that seemed to imply that it did. I was actually about to suggest that the NSF article be reverted to a redirect to CULT OF THE DEAD COW, but I see that you've already suggested that. So, that's my vote.
Redirectfor now, until when/if there's ever more notable content. And what does Sn0wflake mean by cDc being "contestably notable?" Just curious. I have no interest in arguing about this. --Myles Long 12:33, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)- It becomes clear now. Your original paragraph can be read two ways. I read it as your putting forward the fact that you are a cDc member as the actual rationale for keeping this article, rather than as your simply providing full disclosure of a personal bias. I cannot answer your question about what Sn0wflake wrote; but it wasn't really addressed to me. In turn my second question still stands, addressed to the world in general. Uncle G 16:37, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
- Yeah, I realize that my original comment was ambiguous. I just meant to disclose personal bias. And no, right now, I don't think the NSF is particular encyclopedic. Hence my vote for redirect. That isn't to say that it will not someday be encyclopedic. --Myles Long 17:01, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- It becomes clear now. Your original paragraph can be read two ways. I read it as your putting forward the fact that you are a cDc member as the actual rationale for keeping this article, rather than as your simply providing full disclosure of a personal bias. I cannot answer your question about what Sn0wflake wrote; but it wasn't really addressed to me. In turn my second question still stands, addressed to the world in general. Uncle G 16:37, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
- Yawn. No, I'm not a member of NSF, but I do have a vested interest in its well-being, that's all I meant. The NSF isn't a subgroup, either...it's more like a semi-autonomous collective under the cDc umbrella. But whatever. I didn't mean that cDc's having done more than BO was relevant to this discussion; I was merely responding to the previous "delete" vote that seemed to imply that it did. I was actually about to suggest that the NSF article be reverted to a redirect to CULT OF THE DEAD COW, but I see that you've already suggested that. So, that's my vote.
- I doubt it. The fact that you are a member of CULT OF THE DEAD COW doesn't seem relevant at all. The fact that CULT OF THE DEAD COW has done more than Back Orifice would be relevant were we discussing the CULT OF THE DEAD COW article. But we aren't. We're discussing Ninja Strike Force. Are you a member of Ninja Strike Force? Can you include in this article, which currently reads like a combined membership roster (Wikipedia is not a directory) and community noticeboard (Wikipedia is not a free hosting service), any reason that it is encyclopaedia-worthy? Remember that stuff that is too secret for Wikipedia won't help. Uncle G 11:21, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
- Delete, not notable, promo.Megan1967 08:18, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Take out the membership directory and the community noticeboard, and the only content that is left is either content that we can already find in CULT OF THE DEAD COW or a nearly-substub description of an apparently less-than-stellar low-budget martial-arts film. Redirect (nothing to merge) to CULT OF THE DEAD COW unless someone writes something worthwhile about the movie. Uncle G 11:21, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
- Given GRider's recent additions to the article (which I think constitute someone writing "something worthwhile about the movie"), I am changing my vote back to Keep, where my vote shall stay. --Myles Long 18:11, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:49, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
- May I ask why? Just curious. The movie seems to warrant its own article now, in the very least.--Myles Long 19:43, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, at least the movie should stay. Grue 17:08, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and expand the movie. merge the CULT OF THE DEAD COW stuff to that article, leaving only a link at the top of the page. I also don't understand why the disambig template is there. Thryduulf 23:31, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- keep this please its a real movie Yuckfoo 00:55, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and expand the film and merge the cDc content into its parent article. Next. —RaD Man (talk) 07:27, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, now that the movie information is there, merge the cult stuff to its article. (I can understand why this page was originally nominated, and would have voted to delete if the page had remained the way it was when it the tag was added)--BaronLarf 08:26, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, at least as a movie (GRider's been doing some good after all). If the CDC stuff is merged with the CDC article, then a link should remain at the top of the page --Kieran 13:47, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.