Talk:United-TI

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Non-notable?

FYI: ticalc.org had a well written and informative wikipedia article that was deleted because it was deemed not notable or important - don't be surprised if this article is nominated for the same proceedings in the future. Allynfolksjr 05:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

ticalc.org not notable!? Who the fuck was running that VfD anyway!? That is on a level of absurdity that is just, well, just absurd. I believe there is a process for requesting an article be undeleted. I am going to investigate. How come nobody was paying attention and commenting though? -- Toksyuryel ^{talk | contrib} Image:Toksyuryel wikipedia sig img.jpg 08:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I know - it's absolutely insane. IIRC, the person who started it was someone who was angry at the community for some reason, and by the time anyone got a wiff about the VfD, it was far too late to do anything about it. Allynfolksjr 00:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

That sounds a bit more serious. It is a SERIOUS violation of wikipedia policy to carry out a VfD without having a notification at the top of the article page that is the subject of the VfD. I unfortunately cannot seem to find the VfD for that article, perhaps you could point me to it? -- Toksyuryel ^{talk | contrib} Image:Toksyuryel wikipedia sig img.jpg 20:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

so does this have to be deleted because ticalc.org was? and why can't ticalc.org be recreated, since its obvious the proceedings around its deletion were a bit sketchy? elfprince13

I don't see anything that validates this page being here. The entire thing is talk about who hosted the site and who deleted spam. UTI's only been around a short while, and according to this page has only had 1 featured program ever see completion. Regardless of that though, the most basic requirement for being notable is 3rd party publishing something directly about the organization. Simply being popular among a small group of people is not enough. Now, if a new article were to be written that encompasses the entire TI community that would be a bit more worthy due to the fact that there have been several articles published about individuals in the community and their works. Unless some one can actually dig up a accredited article about UTI, not about a person or project associated with UTI, this page should be deleted based on wikipedia's guidelines, no bias or malice intended.

As for ticalc.org, that shouldn't have been deleted, probably should have been rewritten. The reason it would be notable was because it fell into the news when TI released a CD containing Ticalc.org's entire archive, parents found out that the disc had adult material on it and spoke out about it. I could get news articles or a press release from TI themselves without to much hassle. --66.68.236.16 03:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I was going to write something similar to what 66.68.236.16 stated, but when I refreshed it was posted. Agreed with above. This site is small even within the calculator community and certainly reads as a personal narrative. Allynfolksjr 03:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)