A few days ago, a certain Wikipedian nominated the article for a "speedy deletion". He did so saying that the article "appears to have been started by the staff" and used Wikipedia's G11 speedy deletion template which is used for: "Pages that exist only to promote a company, product, or service."
If this guy thinks that page was a commercial for our site, he probably knows as much about marketing as I do about knitting. Probably even less. First of all, the article wasn't written by us, one of our readers from Asia took care of that. After the Wiki editors were done with it the page was unflattering at best. However, much of it was done well, and it contained accurate info about us, so we didn't really mind.
Another guy said that the our editor was "using Wikipedia to promote his website. Even when you Google for his name, Wikipedia is the #2 hit after the URL", which simply isn't true. You can check for yourself, just type in his name and click.
There's another interesting thing. The reader who nominated us for extinction is an adamant Dailytech reader, at least judging by his other Wiki contributions. In fact, he linked quite a few DT stories in other articles. He did the same with Khristopher "Rydermark" Kubickie's interview with our friend Ajith Ramachandran, the developer of, you've guessed it - Rydermark.
One of the issues seems to be that we're not referenced enough or cited in print. The fact that we're linked daily on several sites such as XBitlabs, and that a Google search for Fudzilla will get you 100+k results doesn't seem to concern them. We have less than 2000 articles online at the moment, do the math.
Well, if they could nominate Mike Magee for deletion, why shouldn't we get the same honor ? Who knows, maybe we don't really exist, since no sources claiming otherwise, nor our parents, can be found and referenced on Wikipedia.
You can check out the Fudzilla article, or at least what's left of it, on Wikipedia, here.