Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Digital yearbook

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 DELETE the content but recast as a redirect to yearbook and merge a bit (the opening sentences) into that article. Herostratus 03:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Digital yearbook

Digital yearbook (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

I am nominating this for deletion because the page is un-sourced, culturally biased, poorly written and not relevant to wikipedia as it is a very minor subsection to yearbooks as a whole and does not meet notability criteria. The use of a question as a categorisation on the page to then comprise a list, this is not productive pros that wikipedia aspires too. I think far too much work is required for this page to be salvaged and the notability of the subject as a stand alone is unjustified.--Jjamesj 13:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete as per nom.--Jjamesj 13:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Redirect to yearbook as its electronic version; this article is a total advertisement that contains nothing of merge value. Resurgent insurgent 14:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Redirect to yearbook and include a graf or two stating the basics of what a digital yearbook is. A new trend that may be interesting, but no need to go further until they gain in popularity. [[Briguy52748 18:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)]]
  • Redirect per Briguy52748. --Matt 22:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep or Redirect to yearbook at least. I found one ABC news story on this and a few other independent sources in just a few minutes. The writing problems could be easily fixed and are not criteria for deletion IMO. The list of possible uses greatly expands on the possibilities of a traditional paper yearbook. The linkfarm at the bottom has to go either way. I also propose to merge horseless carriage to surrey.:) =killing sparrows 05:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)=
  • Comment, if it stays I'll rewrite and source. =killing sparrows 05:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)=
  • Redirect to yearbook. Do not delete prior to redirecting in order to preserve the edit history if it will aid killing sparrows in rewriting the article. -- Black Falcon 23:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment If the result is merge or delete can this be sent to my user page (or a subpage) so that I can cull it for a mention in the Yearbook article? I don't know the ins and outs of all the processes here. Thnx --killing sparrows 23:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. 90-95% advertisement. - Aagtbdfoua 02:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
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.