Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ClueNet (2nd nomination)

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ClueNet

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

Article was deleted back in 2008. Since its recreation, it has been nominated for CSD-G12 and CSD-G4. The G12 was declined, one admin declined the G4, and one admin (myself) accepted the G4. Since there seem to be questions regarding the G4, and in fact the notability of the subject, the suggestion was made to bring it to the community. The main issue seems to be WP:N, so it's being nominated here as non-notable. SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 18:27, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:16, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:WEB. No evidence of additional notability since it was last deleted, and it's written with a rather nasty POV ("Most Internet services, including chatrooms, are filled with people that have no intent of helping others") Geez. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Seems N, and poorly written isn't a matter for AfD. Maury Markowitz (talk) 00:14, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Is there any evidence of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources? --Pnm (talk) 04:24, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps FSDaily or Linux Today. Furthermore, ClueBot has been mentioned in many papers (Google Scholar it), and by a few news stories. A subset of ClueNet runs/develops the ClueBots, as well. My $0.02. -- Cobi^(t|c|b) 05:33, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:18, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Maury Markowitz.Sanfernandocourt (talk) 04:52, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep with notability needs establishing with refs - I tagged obvious problems Widefox (talk) 16:26, 2 January 2011 (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.