Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ram Jam
Ram Jam (demoscene section only) 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 EDIT THE PAGE, REMOVE THE DEMOSCENE SECTION
This applies to the "Demoscene group" section of this page only. Page originally created by User:Twilek, reference to the band later added. The only backlinks relating to the demoscene group are from their user page and Demoscene (history entry - look who added it). The link provided is dead. Propose to remove the section on the demoscene group, leaving only the rock band. Failing that, to place the subject of greater notability first. 82.6.10.139 02:43, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Further note: Google for "ram jam" -"black betty" produces lots of results, but nothing on the first page references the demoscene group. "ram jam" -"black betty" demogroup gives 17, of which 3 of the first top 10 appear to be copies of the Wikipedia article. The page should be for the band first, or for the band only. (Furehter tests 82.6.10.139 03:22, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC) )
*Sorry...that would be me. These seem legit, but then again I haven't done the usual litmus test yet. No vote for now. - Lucky 6.9 02:54, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I'm confused. What's "these"? I thought that "these" was a plural reference - there is only one section of one page listed here :)
***There is...? Oh, hell. I thought this was a double nomination. Now I'm confused! :^P - Lucky 6.9 03:26, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)
This is weird. Someone put this nomination here, but didn't post the headers on either article nor did they post a reason for deletion. Stranger still, the articles are legit. Keep both and remove this notice. - Lucky 6.9 02:38, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Since the recommendation is only to edit out a section of the article and not to delete the entire article, this discussion belongs on the article's talk page, not here. Or even better, be bold and make the change yourself. (Or am I missing something?) Rossami 03:43, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- I thought that killing the section straight away would get me branded as a vandal :o) - I've commented out that section for now, for someone to get rid of later if nobody objects. 82.6.10.139 08:13, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- It will not get you labeled as a vandal if you document what you did and why in either the edit summary or the article's talk page. By the way, I encourage you to get a free user account and log in so we can have these conversations directly. Happy editing. Rossami
- I thought that killing the section straight away would get me branded as a vandal :o) - I've commented out that section for now, for someone to get rid of later if nobody objects. 82.6.10.139 08:13, 31 Jul 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.