Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EyeBuyDirect.com
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. BJTalk 19:50, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- EyeBuyDirect.com (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Article on a minor e-commerce company, propped up by passing mentions in local and trade press (and a press release). No evidence for actual impact or notability. Calton | Talk 14:59, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - as the article stands, it seems nothing short of a wikipediaized publicity effort, with a press release space on Reuters. Hard to see why this article would be encyclopedia-worthy. Some of the statistics could perhaps be appropriate in a article concerning trends in eyewear. As such, not notable, slightly spammish. Casimirpo (talk) 18:14, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Advertising. The article even mentions their use of viral marketing and Facebook. 81.178.67.229 (talk) 18:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 02:38, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Independent news coverage establishes notability per WP:CORP. The company is by far the best known online optical prescription retailer. Owen× ☎ 08:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Abstain. Please consider these references that could be included in the article:
- Wall Street Journal [1]
- Internet Retailer [2] [3]
- Kiplinger [4]
- The owner of the site contacted me and asked for help. Because they don't understand how to participate here, I am posting this on their behalf. I will direct the site owner to read WP:BFAQ. Jehochman Talk 12:48, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you, Jehochman! I've added the four refs to the article. Eventually we'll have to trim the list down, but for now it's okay to over-cite. Owen× ☎ 13:18, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The Internet Retailer articles seem like copy from a press release, the rest seem like small mentions in more general consumer articles. Aubergine (talk) 20:30, 16 July 2009 (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.