Talk:Subeta

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's not everyday you see a site with awesome items,such as the Shake It Santa. Hehe,Subeta is one of my favorite sites. Great graphics,lots of members.. If 'Buffalo Buffalo Buffalo' can have a Wikipedia,why not Subeta? -Reighn

You know, I might actually agree with you Reighn. Brenton.eccles 08:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Subeta absolutely deserves a page here at Wiki. To start, it has a ton of users that are very active and friendly as well as appropriate for children of all ages. It also has better graphics and is unique to the internet browser based games in the fact that you not only have your pets, but you also now have avatars to edit and customize as well. You can even still collect avatars on this site. That and you give Neopets and other internet based browser game sites a page Subeta should have one too. In all fairness of course. :)71.205.164.38 08:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Subeta is one of the most popular petsites out there and growing everyday. It definitely /needs/ an article. ~ Balet

Subeta is notable. It's a site with hundreds of thousands of users.

We deserve an article, and you know it......

I agree, Subeta does have a lot of users and is extremely popular. It's definitely noteworthy enough to have its own article. 216.67.47.49 08:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Subeta is an interesting and popular site among todays internet users and is suitable for all ages. As it is popular it deserves a page on this fine site.203.109.211.179 08:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Look, if my school in Australia gets an article with 2k students, why shouldn't Subeta get an article with 150k users? Chikken 08:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

If there are articles on people notable for doing one small piece of work and have, at most, a few lines of text, then I don't understand why Subeta, a huge interactive site, can't have an article in Wikipedia. Honestly, where is the harm in that? ~Hour

Because an article on a site no one has heard of (I haven't) is spam. An article about someone who did one thing neat is educational. --Indolences 08:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Subeta is the best pet site EVER. The art is awesome, the admins are great, the people in there are really nice and there are MANY other cool things about it. It should really have it's own article, just because it deserves it. Suiseisekichan 08:12, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

@Indolences: This site has over 100,000 users, and over 2,000 unique page views per day. I don't believe that's spam.

Subeta is becoming bigger everyday, and as it grows, the popularity grows. People expect Wikipedia to have pages on anything and everything, and Subeta is one of those everythings! 24.253.98.155 08:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Subeta is a fast growing and popular website that definitely should be recognized by Wikipedia.

Excellent site for all ages, and extraordinary staff, that keep users in touch with all the changes, progressions the site is planning. Very unique in that respect, and much appreciated by all users. Input is always welcomed by staff, unlike many other sites, where users are pretty much ignored. 142.163.146.145 08:27, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

puddingshadow: Subeta really is noteworthy. the creator of the site is an ambitious young man. He is only 16 so he began Subeta at 14.! No other site can boast that.The people are wonderful,Staff is amazing. And best of all it is not so big that it forgets it's users like some other sites I could name. Subeta is very worthy of having it's own page! And it doesn't matter how young or old you are(I'm 40) It is a great place for everyone!

Subeta does not deserve a Wiki. It is majorly unstable, with a server problem that has lasted for months, and several downtimes a day. Though it is fun to play when bored, it still has a long way to go before it can be compared to the phenomenon that is Neopets - it's not exactly fun having to wait until the site comes back up from the very frequent downtimes. 08:49, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Confirm. Subeta is down as I type.

Contents 1 Hahahaha 2 Subeta 3 Why 4 Subeta needs an article. 5 Why not?

[edit] Hahahaha

I just checked this site out. I thought it was like a (real) pet enthusiast site. It's virtual pets. I support the deletion of this article. --Indolences 08:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

• edit: Nice addition to the index Mr. Admin:

Click here to read about the current situtation.
Also, everyone should go to the Subeta Wikipedia discussion page, and tell everyone 
at wikipedia that we deserve an article! 

Please don't delete my comments. --Indolences 08:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

The previous article on Subeta was total rubbish, and was defeneatly not encyclopedic in any way. Subeta, can in some way be compared to Marapets, which isn't yet credible enough to have an article about it on here. Subeta isn't really well known. Honestly, I'm yet to meet one fellow Subeta user in real life. It's not that I'm totally against there being an article about Subeta, its just that Subeta hasn't become even a "small business" yet, by definition, its an online microbusiness. Subeta needs some achievements about it, really good ones, because unfortunately; 100 000 users, 6000+ items, 54+ pet species and such will probably not meet Wikipedia's quality standards. I'm searching everywhere on Wikipedia that I possibly can, and I just cant find one article about a website of Subeta's size. I think Subeta needs to develop and expand more before it is able to have an article on Wikipedia. I love Subeta, I've got a fansite for it, which includes a wiki, but its just not ready for Wikipedia, if you remember the last article, it was horrible reading, and I tried to present any corporal information, and besides the number of employs, there really is none. Might it also be noted that just because Subeta has a wonderful atmosphere, doesnt make it wikipedia worthy. Brenton.eccles 08:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

There are many minor things that get wikipedia articles, why shouldn't Subeta? It's got a hell of a lot more people that are interested in it then some of the random stuff that gets put in wikipedia.

Subeta isn't appropriate for all ages. It does nothing to maintain the sort of environment that a young crowd deserves.

Subeta isn't directed at all ages. 13 and up. Brenton.eccles 08:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Right, there were just so many comments on here that the site was great for all ages.

Subeta is an amazing site full of friendly, talented, and hard working people who enjoy playing a game, instead of greedily hounding after every single point and item. From the gorgeous pets and creative items to the Site feel and Staff itself, you'll find everything you want and more there! The staff are actually able to be CONTACTED, so you know you'll get a personal response instead of some cold automated response spat out from a machine. There are many things to do during the day, and many things to keep you occupied. I believe I speak for a good number of people when I say Subeta deserves an article in Wikipedia.

• And noted in the agreement to sign up, you'll notice it states that the site is "PG-13", meaning you MUST be 13 years old to sign up. So true it may not be aimed at younger audiences, but what about the older ages?~ Devikins

By the way, Subeta WAS unstable. Now they are changing servers so the site can get better and better. And they keep everyone knowing what's happening, how things are going and etc. They actually care about users. So don't come and say to me that Subeta doesn't deserves/needs an article in wikipedia. Cause it does. Suiseisekichan 18:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

What I and others are saying, is that just because the staff are compassionate, caring, communicative people, doesnt make subeta good enough for a subeta article. there are glitches round the site, and the sites still heading in some direction, that we dont know where. finally, its not a corporation with employees, and such, take a look at the grey infobox on the Neopets or GoPets article to see what I mean. 58.164.122.20 03:42, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

o.o Glitches happen in every pet site. I don't think a site needs to be a corporation to have an article. Well, even if that's what all the other cool pet sites are doing, Subeta is different. That's what makes it even more special. Even if it becomes a huuge corporation in the future, it will still be special. Anyway, in my opinion, it really should have an article, even if a small one. =\ Just because. There are articles about everything in here, why not Subeta? But meh, I don't really mind if subeta doesn't has an article in wikipedia right now. It will, eventually. Suiseisekichan 20:13, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah, not to mention how the site is so nondiscriminatory. On every other site, you'll end up being bashed for being homosexual or for not believing in a certain god (trust me, other pet sites have BANNED ME for talking about such things...), here opinions are accepted wholeheartedly~ Anyway, back on topic, hopefully we'll be able to have our article soon... 115,000+ members now, and actually growing more and more each day...

Neopets warns people of discussing such topics, since it has younger viewers and it is meant to prevent people from influincing children. Disinclination 22:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Subeta

I'm new to Subeta and came here to look it up and learn it's history and was suprised there is no article. Why is there no article? Theres thousands of users, active users at that. There are tons of useless articles on here that never get deleted, but Subeta is big enough and old enough to deserve an article. It seems any other virtual petsite besides Neopets is always discriminated upon. Someone needs to write a good article about Subeta and submit it. ~K —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.82.172.122 (talk) 20:49, 21 February 2007 (UTC).

Yes, I was a bit suprised too. I'd want to work on one.. but I feel we'd need more experienced Wikipedia editors to work with it, since alot of people said it wasn't "noteable". I've seen MUDs with only 16 members have a Wikipedia article.. but not a pet website that doesn't whore itself out for capitalism that has over 100k members? I don't even know what the count is now (I can check it out later, this computer won't show the website). But yes, it should have its own article. Disinclination 20:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Another note: Almost everyone on this talk page said Subeta has its own article. Why is this being ignored? Disinclination 20:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Aparently there was an article about Subeta, and Marapets on Wiki, but both have disapeared for one reason or another.

No one's heard of Subeta? Just take a look at Deviant art. There are tons of people who have artwork from Subeta on there, not just fan art either, but actual items and such that they created specificly for the site.

True, Subeta, and other sites of the kind, aren't as comerciely oriented as Neopets, but I don't think it would hurt Wikipedia to have one, short, article on here.

[edit] Why

In order to have an article on wikipedia both Subeta and Marapets need to meet the criteria of WP:WEB. Consensus decision in the last AfD debates for both websites suggest they do not meet these criteria and should not, yet, be included in Wikipedia. MidgleyDJ 01:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Subeta needs an article.

Blah blah blah. There are so many random useless articles on here that no one cares about. It seems only when a petsite or community *similar* (and in my opinion subeta is not similar at all.. the only thing even close to being the same is the fact both neopets and subeta have pets.. and the pets are not the main focus of Subeta. It's not called subetaPETS. Duh. ) to Neopets pops up , people right away are OMG YOU COPIED NEOPETS!!11!! As if Neopets is supreme ruler of the world. That's like saying every brand of car copied off of Ford. Or that every brand of tooth past copied off Crest or Colgate or something. Neopets was NOT the first 'pet site'. It is now a crappy coperation that treats its users like only statistics. Subeta is notable. Subeta has alot of ACTIVE members and has a staff that doesn't treat everyone horribly. Subeta needs an article. Stop trying to pull all of these stupid rules out of no where to make excuses. It's stupid. How often do articles actually follow the rules completely anyways? Hardly ever I've noticed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.30.49.240 (talk) 14:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

The neopets article has nothing to do with this article. See my comments under "Why" section above. If Subeta meets the notability guidelines (WP:WEB) it can be included in Wikipedia. If, as you say, it is notable -- then provide some information which demonstrates it meets WP:WEB. The existence of other articles on Wikipedia that dont meet the notabilty guidelines has nothing to do with this article. Moreover, if you find articles that dont qualify for entry feel free to tag them for notability concerns. MidgleyDJ 00:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why not?

I still do not understand why the page was protected to prevent re-creation. I can understand if the last few article versions were spam, but just add the Category:Cleanup from *insert date here*. And, by the way, to rebut the statement above about "No one's heard of Subeta," there are 117,715 users as of this moment. and 613 users have registered today. where is the reasoning behind this?? And if Neopets can have one, why can't Subeta (Midgley!!)?

PS: Subeta came first. PPS: Subeta is back up. they were getting better servers. most Web sites go through that at least once. it's not a bad point.

151.204.241.143 22:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

User:151.204.241.143 - read the requirements for WP:WEB. Again, the existence of other articles, like Neopets has nothing to do with Subeta. The answer here is simple: When Subeta meets WP:WEB then it should have an article in WP. Membership number is not something that counts towards notability under WP:WEB. Hope this helps, MidgleyDJ 07:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

If people still don't understand why Subeta fails WP:WEB, here goes:

Point 1: wider notability. It has not been discussed in print or on news websites.

Point 2: awards. It has won no awards.

Point 3: content distribution. Its content is distributed solely by itself.

I actually helped to edit the page prior to deletion, in a vain attempt to get it to encyclopaedic standard, and I firmly agree that it is non-notable. --Dandelions 15:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC)