Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JamStudio.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 delete. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:41, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

JamStudio.com

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Appears to fail WP:NWEB. The Media section consists of 19 links it asserts all feature the product. However, all of these reviews happened over a short period of time and there's little indication the site has had a lasting impact on the Internet or the culture surrounding it. Furthermore, most of the reviews are hosted on blogs or social media sites e.g. StumbleUpon and eMusician. The other coverage, save for Fox, is mainly localised or lacks editorial oversight. SITH (talk) 16:49, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 18:11, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 18:11, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

*Just a comment, StraussInTheHouse... eMusician (Electronic Musician) is an actual magazine rather than a blog, and a reliable source if cited properly... it's just not clear from the citation link in the article if the review was copied from Electronic Musician to a personal web page, and without a proper citation it can't be verified. Richard3120 (talk) 02:12, 10 January 2019 (UTC) Sorry, I understand what you mean now... that Electronic Musician is reliable, but because it's hosted on a blog site, it can't be verified. Richard3120 (talk) 12:25, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nom. None of the sources are substantial enough / reliable enough to support a claim of notability for this flash-in-the-pan website. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:45, 11 January 2019 (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.