Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adopt-a-Pet.com

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 keep. Notability appears to exist (might be better supported with specific sources), promotionalism issues can be fixed in other ways. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:49, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adopt-a-Pet.com

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Rely only on non-credible media sources. Merely Press Release on media. Article is written only for promotional and advertising purposes. No significant coverage by independent media. Nothing significant or notable about the site to be here. does not meet notability criteria. Light21 16:27, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Delete, sadly - a good cause, but this is a blatantly promotional article with mostly promotional sources - what RS coverage there is probably isn't enough to swing it - David Gerard (talk) 16:48, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 16:56, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 16:56, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 16:56, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:36, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:36, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – More source search options provided below. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:38, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:39, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep' A bit weak, but passes WP:GNG by virtue of being the largest of it's kind non-profit in North America. Not sure where nominator is getting "written only for promotional and advertising purposes" from. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 04:31, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Current sourcing not ideal, but WP:NEXIST. This is a large national organization and sourcing appears to be available, including under the organization's former name (1-800-Save-a-Pet.com). Safehaven86 (talk) 19:50, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Quality is poor, but passes GNG. Nationwide, sourcing adequate. Might want to do some searches under the old name for refs. Montanabw^(talk) 21:41, 20 September 2016 (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.