Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fish Smarty

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. postdlf (talk) 13:36, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fish Smarty

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

non notable website, pure spam WuhWuzDat 14:46, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:33, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:27, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wuhwuzdat,

Marking Fish Smarty as a non notable website and pure spam is outrageous. The website has thousands of visitors every month due the educational content it delivers. All the content provided is targeted at parents with kids 3-9 years old. The educational drawings, comics, games, contests are valuable learning sources. Recently kindergartens start using the website as teaching platform therefore marking Fish Smarty Wikipedia entry as spam is inappropriate.

All references and categories are valid.

May i ask you to review your entry and check the previous marking and history of the article?

Thank you Andrewrichard (talk) 15:00, 11 April 2011 (UTC) — Andrewrichard (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

The main rules are WP:Notability and WP:Verifiability, both of which rely on WP:Reliable sources. What you need is sources, Andrewrichard. Sources independent of the Fish Smarty project, independent of financial interests, (for example, Amazon.com pages used to source books). Use Google Books and the other links up at the top of this section. I looked and could not find anything, but with what you know about the organization it may be easier for you. Regular Google is ok, too, but the quality of sources is usually lower. The trick with the wording in the article is to show the organization to be important, not say it is. "The goal of Fish Smarty is to deliver a safe place where children have fun, enjoy various activities and learn at the same time." is a statement you could just about get away with proving with a citation from the organization, but "Nothing is more important than online safety for children and parents together..." is not salvageable. Delete unsupportable statements of opinion like this. Trust me, it is either little things like that (that parents can read on the site anyway), or lose the whole article altogether. Good luck. Anarchangel (talk) 01:29, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, New content and recommendation from educationalkidswebsites were added to show that this portal is appreaciated around the world by parents. Please review and withdraw from deletion.

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trusttheguru (talk • contribs) 08:38, 16 April 2011 (UTC) — Trusttheguru (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:20, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: thousands of visitors is not enough to make this site notable. Alexius08 (talk) 06:54, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article is constantly updated based on company evolution and presence on the web. The site is notable thru the content it provides. There are very few sites out there on the web which provide educational content via child design interface and via an advanced UI. The UI simplicity was brought to light by the artists and collaborators they use (see section Company / Meet the team). In addition to this the community of friends they have on Facebook is quite considerable (+2000 friends) and Twitter is growing every day on average by 10%.

The website is providing an educational added value to parents and kids, who are the main consumers as such. And that's what it makes the site notable. Let's not expect that their presence is notable comparing to Disney, however it is notable comparing to Moshi Monsters. Joelangman (talk) 06:19, 19 April 2011 (UTC) — Joelangman (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

More content has been added, really enjoyed how they present the world of education for the kids, using the characters. Each one represent actually a real personality in which kids can find each other or the people around them. Thus this is much easier for children to understand and learn. Such kind of learning process is making the difference and is sustain by all the fans from social media channels. Please review and do not delete this article. Trusttheguru — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trusttheguru (talk • contribs) 10:24, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not enough reliable, THIRD-PARTY sources to satisfy notability. Also put off buy all the SPA's suddenly appearing here. ArcAngel (talk) ) 10:32, 19 April 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.