Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fluc
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 JERRY talk contribs 03:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
non-notable website Christoph StSmith (talk) 09:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete, I originally speedied this, but agreed to let the creator have a little bit more time when he contested the speedy and pledged to find some more reliable sources. That's been done to a degree, but most of the mentions are trivial and minor. Regretfully think it's probably not a notable enough subject yet. Lankiveil (talk) 10:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
- Speedy delete Notability isn't asserted. Only external links with mentions of this site are provided and those are blogs, which are not acceptable sources per WP:SPS TheBilly (talk) 10:27, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- -- pb30<talk> 02:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi Guys, I just thought considering the coverage from well known and established blogs - that these were considered pretty good sources. There are countless other websites on wikipedia, which haven't been deleted, and yet have much less credible sources than this one. Im only new to wikipedia - but if 5 well-known and reputable blogs with >100K of readers isn't notable. I don't know what is. AJThomasScott (talk) 04:44, 8 January 2008 (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.