Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tard Blog

Tard Blog was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. 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 to keep the article.

Besides the offensiveness of the subject matter and the website's name, it has an Alexa ranking of 131,345. Non-notable. Rick K 06:28, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Advertisement for a sick humor blog. Delete. --Slowking Man 08:33, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a web directory. Delete Wyllium 09:42, 2004 Nov 15 (UTC)
Delete: Wikipedia is even less a blog guide. Geogre 17:21, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep: There are no valid reasons for deletion of this article. Yes the site features potentially offensive humor but so does http://www.portalofevil.com which presents its offensive humor in a much less charitable manner. http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.com actually encourages readers to commit suicide and murder children. http://www.darwinawards.com makes fun of people for dying. These all have articles that are not challenged. As for its Alexa rating, both http://www.pathetic.org and http://www.thingsmygirlfriendandihavearguedabout.com have significantly higher ratings. Things My Girlfriend and I Have Argued About has a rating in the 300,000s and Pathetic has a rating over 900,000. The issue is the blunt way in which the site referenced discusses mental retardation, in an accurate light. Americans love the developmentally disabled as long as they are some fictional Forrest Gump who warms the heart, but the moment they are faced with true mental disability they shrink back in offense. Tard Blog isn't cute, it isn't nice, what it is is real and accurate, warts and all. The most disturbing thing is that this site might be taken down for no other reason than it removes comfortable illusions. --Ensrifraff 06:47, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep. What Ensrifraff said! Very well known blog. -- Chuq 00:32, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Delete despite the above good argument. An article about humour in stressful siuations would be valid but this is not the article and Tardblog isn't the place to begin it. ping 07:42, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
No, we should not have every damn site. Alexa isn't a bad proxy for notability online, and this is much too low. Delete. Cool Hand Luke 00:49, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Check out the alexa rank for Wikinfo some time. anthony 警告 21:16, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Additionally, many other sites which have articles have much lower Alexa ratings, as noted in my vote explanation. Therefore this is a case of selective prosecution, which I will not have. --Ensrifraff 22:10, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Delete - Take the Tard Blog, put him on the Tard Cart (yeah, that little yellow bus) and send him to Tard Valhalla. —ExplorerCDT 02:18, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Delete. "Comfortable illusions" about any issue may be removed (or sustained, or tweaked...) with factual information in the appropriate Wikipedia article. But you or I can't just put up a website about X or Y, much as it might "remove comfortable illusions," and merit a Wikipedia article on that basis. Insufficiently notable. Samaritan 03:50, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep. In this particular case, it's quite notable, and random people I've spoken with have known about it. Generally BLOGs are not notable, but this is an exception. --Improv 05:17, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep. Notable. Alexa rank is high enough. Being about offensive material is a horrible reason for deletion because it is terribly POV. anthony 警告 21:16, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Are you planning on creating articles on the other 131,344 pages, or do you even edit any real pages any more? RickK 06:55, Nov 20, 2004 (UTC)
  - Rick, this issue was already addressed in my original vote. I suggest you read the Alexa ratings of other pages that have articles. When are you planning on removing the pathetic.org or thingsmygirlfriendandihavearguedabout.com articles? If not, then please stop objecting to the Alexa rating of Tard Blog.--Ensrifraff 08:13, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  - I couldn't possibly create articles on 131,344 sites without using an automated tool, and I seriously doubt such a tool would be approved. But as I've said elsewhere, there are plenty of sites with a worse alexa ranking. Are you planning on listing Wikinfo and Wikitravel for deletion? Better add Nupedia, as Tard Blog currently gets more hits than Nupedia ever got. Maybe we could create an automatic page-destruction bot which removes pages on any website with a rank worse than 131,343. As for your unfounded personal attack, I edit thousands of "real pages". anthony 警告 15:24, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep. I have to agree with Anthony on this one. GRider 22:46, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep because the reasons given for deletion aren't good enough: there are lots of articles on wikipedia that have a minority intrest, but are still encyclopedic (Daf-2 anyone?). For a niche website the Alexa ranking doesn't seem that bad. Send to cleanup. Joe D (t) 23:24, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep. Intrigue 04:21, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep. --JuntungWu 09:50, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep. --Tmh 14:06, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep. Mark Richards 20:36, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep. Site appears to be a bit notable, and offensiveness is not a reason to delete. --Goobergunch 00:07, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep it. What Goobergunch said. [[User:Radman1|RaD Man (talk)]] 18:35, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep. I vote for what I despise with the same fervour as for what I love. Dr Zen 07:20, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep. - Drstuey 15:42, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Keep Ashibaka tlk 23:32, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Delete No encyclopedic inmformation here. --Wetman 00:52, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.