I noticed that Qazz started a draft of a Cemetech article at the link below; you're all welcome to edit it to your heart's content. If Qazz decides it turns out well, he is considering trying it out as a real article. Please be careful to keep a neutral point of view (NPOV) if you do edit it, and cite sources. It's important that it not be a self-promotion article, so cite good and bad things about Cemetech and its projects, and review the Wikipedia standards on notability and NPOV. We were chatting on IRC, and it seems that Cemetech (barely) fits the Notability guidelines, but don't be disappointed if it gets deleted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Qazz42/Cemetech

I'll lead the quest to have it deleted.

That goes without saying, of course.

The article does look nice, but I don't believe it will survive at Wikipedia without being deleted... I think there was a ticalc.org article once, but it got deleted.

Based on our IRC discussion, the gamble is that Cemetech has been cited on enough independent, verifiable sources such as Gizmodo and Engadget to qualify under W:Notability. But yes, there have previously been articles on Cemetech, ticalc.org, and Omnimaga, and all have been deleted.

Well I tried to add that you were our "1337 pwner king" but someone got rid of it

on-topic, I think that we are doing pretty good so far, we just have to remember to keep it un-biased (which I unfortunately did not adhere too by mistake). BTW, what exactly were the reasons for everyone to hate your project's Kerm?

I think it's more than notable enough just because of all the other wikipedia articles that reference it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=Cemetech

Man, the sarcasm is just leaking through my computer....

that aside, Dshiz, you forgot about the countless articles and blogs that Kerm is counting too (hackaday and slahdot mainly `-`)

I'll probably be adding a lot to this article.

shouldn't it be moved to it's own page, not a branch of qazz?

The article-writing guides recommend that that be done when a good article framework is in place, including references, otherwise you're likely to end up in the Speedy Deletion queue. Souvik, sweetness. I'll add the citations for the references that make Cemetech verifiable, but I don't want to do too much writing, since I am of course not the least biased individual with regards to Cemetech. Qazz, I don't think that DShiznit was being sarcastic.

I think it was truth, but dipped in sarcasm

I wasn't being sarcastic. You can't read about the TI-83/84 series on wikipedia without reading about something cemetech did.

ah, in that case I apologize for assuming sarcasticness

anyways, what will we use for projects? I got the major ones, but I think I missed a few

Sourcecoder could be listed as a major project.

I added four external references: one for Doors CS 7 from ticalc.org, one from Engadget for Clove 2, one from Slashdot for CALCnet, and one from ticalc.org for SourceCoder.

What about Hackaday for CALCnet? or is that already there? oh, I see it is, never mind then

err, was there a hackaday article for Clove? I remember there being one.... but I could be wrong

There was, and a Gizmodo article, and there's also the Hackaday and Slashdot articles on globalCALCnet. I'll add the references later if you want, or the articles are as follows:

http://gizmodo.com/#!5024693 - DIY Clove 2 Glove Allows You To Type One-Handed, Sans Keyboard
http://games.slashdot.org/story/11/02/22/0340258/Online-Multiplayer-Games-On-TI-Calculators - Online Multiplayer Games on TI Calculators
http://hackaday.com/2011/02/22/global-calcnet-your-ti-83-just-acquired-internet/ - Global CALCnet: Your TI-83 Just Acquired Internet

The difference between Omnimaga, ticalc.org, UTI, etc, is that Cemetech has enough general interest projects and out-of-community coverage to be something other than a niche site.

Indeed, that's the hope, and I feel that the number of articles from notable out-of-community sites backs up that non-niche notability.