Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dump.fm
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 05:11, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Dump.fm (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable website. References to blog posts and web directory listings do not establish notability per WP:WEB. The metronews reference might be non-trivial third party coverage, but a Google search did not turn up similar material. VQuakr (talk) 19:28, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this website. Joe Chill (talk) 19:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. -- —mono 19:58, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Front-end for Twitter. T3h 1337 b0y 19:54, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you provide a little more information? I am not sure I understand your reason. VQuakr (talk) 20:03, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Kinda like ping.fm is notable. T3h 1337 b0y 20:07, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Just because similar stuff exists doesn't mean a product is notable. Notability is determined by significant coverage in reliable sources. —mono 20:22, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Kinda like ping.fm is notable. T3h 1337 b0y 20:07, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you provide a little more information? I am not sure I understand your reason. VQuakr (talk) 20:03, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as article fails WP:GNG (no reliable secondary sources) and WP:WEB. Armbrust Talk Contribs 18:27, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Fails GNG. No outside evidence that the website has enough coverage. Shadowjams (talk) 01:43, 1 July 2010 (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.