 | This article was nominated for deletion on 27 June 2020. The result of the discussion was redirect. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
This page only gives links to itself. It gives no sources, and is just self-advertising. There is no notability at all. Joerger, check what counts as a source before removing the no citations template. It even includes a link to what is a reliable source. 65.5.182.94 (talk) 07:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- Just noticed as well, doing a little googling, both MrTentacle (page creator) and Joerger (the main contributor) are RFL members, so a clear conflict of interest. 65.5.182.94 (talk) 07:15, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- Until there is a clear problem with the article, citing particular editors is actually not the best thing to do. Either fix the content, or if you have serious doubts regarding a specific editor, go through proper channels. This is not the place to single out editors. - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ guestbook ♦ contribs 08:07, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- Please make sure of your sources before making accusations of self-interest. Joerger is not now nor has he ever been a member of the Robot Fighting League. I note that user 65.5.182.94 edited the article to restore outdated information and to remove a second reference that further established notability. The only contributions from user 65.5.182.94 have been attacks on this article. I believe that the recently added references clearly establish the notability of the RFL as the core organization currently driving the sport of combat robotics. If you will grant that combat robotics has notability, then the RFL must itself be notable.Run Amok (talk) 16:26, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
- What notability? It reads like a press release. The only sources are two links to the RFL's own site, and one to a second site, as a measure of notability, when it only seems to have certain events. I notice that it doesn't include Dragon*Con's events, which are arguably more notable (because its been going a lot longer) and so how many others doesn't it include? Notability isn't because it's got more entries on a certain list, that isn't itself exhaustive. This would reduce, in my eyes, the validity of that one external source. Are there any independent, verifiable sources for this article? And of course, Run Amok/Joerger, if you say you're not a member, and thus have no COI, I guess we'll have to take your word on it MuonMan (talk) 20:16, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Repeted Deletion of RFL Chart
User 66.71.9.156 has repeatedly deleted the chart of RFL sanctioned matches, claiming that the chart is outdated. The chart is based on the most recent data from the official RFL website. I requested that user 66.71.9.156 provde a source for the more recent data they claim exists so that I might update the chart, but the user once again deleted the chart, this time without comment.
I have opened a request for moderator assistance, and I would welcome any useful input user 66.71.9.156 might provide.