 | This article was nominated for deletion on 14 February 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
whether 'tis nobler in the mind ... summary of what's going on with this article
editThis article went up for deletion, and was deleted a little bit as a result. Then along came VfU, and a bunch of people, including the closing admin, said "whoops". So User:Snowspinner undeleted it. So, that's why it's still here. Just in case you were wondering. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 14:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Deletion
editIt constitutes bias by inclusion for this to be treated differently from Progressive Bloggers, its equivalent entity on the other end of the political spectrum. They need to be either both kept or both deleted. I am not opposed to further AFD debates if people are unconvinced of notability, but I will absolutely insist that any further deletion attempts batch them together for a single result that applies equally to both. Any process which sees one of them kept and the other deleted constitutes a violation of WP:NPOV. Bearcat 19:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- You're right. I suggested the same. There was a vote on this at the same time, and one on Liblogs, also. You might want to file a deletion review, if there is still time for that. Watchsmart 23:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Hits
editIs there any evidence that the site receives 30,000 hits a day? I find that very hard to believe. Jason Cherniak 18:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Given that Jason Cherniak is in charge of Liblogs, the Liberal Party equivalent of the Blogging Tories, is it really a surprise that he would question these numbers? Lets try to keep the bias away from this site shall we? Canuckman55 11 April 2007
- We need citations for the 30,000 hits/day. Alexa seems not to agree with the number. Hikingdom 05:45, 16 July 2007 (UTC)