Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Single property website
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was Delete per WP:SNOW --JForget 23:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Single property website (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Non notable and obscure topic seemingly added as an advertising method. Lots of recent additions by realtors removed. Article has barely any wikilinks and no reliable third party citation. Mfield (talk) 20:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- SUPPORT: For the reasons stated above, this would be no great loss to the world...Viva-Verdi (talk) 20:14, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Also, the text looks mostly like OR. Nsk92 (talk) 22:52, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. currently it is a bit of a how-to, but notability is the reason for deletion --T-rex 23:03, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom and comments above. - House of Scandal (talk) 01:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Not a notable topic at all. The whole thing is mostly self-promoting OR written by various realtors with clear WP:COI. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Stealth spam with a commercial agenda. Somebody wants to sell you a way to set up these websites, and hopes to use Wikipedia to get more business. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The topic is not notable, which is made clear by the fact that there are, apparently, no reliable third-party sources to be found. It might warrant a sentence or two in a real estate article. --Bonadea (talk) 17:00, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.