Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forvo.com

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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 21:30, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Forvo.com

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

An interesting site, but I don't believe it is notable. Doesn't appear to meet WP:WEB. The only indication of notability is not by a third-party source (it is the "about" page of the site in question), and I can find no reliable sources to back this up. I also cannot find any significant coverage for this website. Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 04:33, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete-Google search failed to turn up anything notable about this subject. The article only has one source, the website itself. Dinosaur Dan1 (talk) 22:24, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The website has been mentioned in a couple of places across the web, including well known sites such as Lifehacker and Mashable - more are listed under the News seciont. To look for Forvo on Google try searching for "forvo -forvo.com" in order to remove self-references (also remove quotations). Also searching from the Spanish Google (google.es) will bring up some interesting results, since the original Forvo was in Spanish and the company that runs it also is from Spain. Although the following does not make it necessarily notable, the database has over 555.000 words and 450.000 pronunciations in 240 languages. Note: If this is kept, I would suggest it simply be called "Forvo" rather than "Forvo.com"

Note: It has also been recently (April 5th) mentioned on Smashing Magazine's Twitter [1] Updated ~ TheSun (talk) 19:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC) ~[reply]
Pages such as Emily Brontë have also been using Forvo as a pronunciation guide. Though perhaps not helping the case as notable, it is interesting to note. It shows how Forvo is becoming better known and used. ~ TheSun (talk) 00:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC) ~[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:19, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:10, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 01:14, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Due to lack of significant coverage in reliable sources.--Pink Bull 05:39, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redacted vote. See below.--Pink Bull 19:12, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. Silver seren^C 05:42, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have tagged this article for rescue. Silver seren^C 05:42, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I was able to find a number of publications that had articles on the website, almost all of them spanish publications. Not everything can be found in English, you have to look beyond that. I have added the sources I found to the article and they establish notability. Silver seren^C 05:42, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Spanish-language coverage both substantial and in reliable sources? If you respond affirmatively to both queries, I would happily redact my vote.--Pink Bull 05:47, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's substantial, yes, there are a couple of sources entirely about the site. As for reliable sources, I don't know. I'm not sure what is reliable for Spanish sources. They appear to be from publications that would be reliable, so I would say yes. Silver seren^C 19:07, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've redacted my vote.--Pink Bull 19:12, 11 April 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.