Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Statoids
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. Consensus is delete - and article does appear to be borderline spam. One interesting (confused?) nomination other than the authors to keep discounted as non-assisting. --VS talk 05:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Statoids (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Non-notable website, borderline spam. See the Afd for the main term, which is looking like a re-direct. I see no point in re-directing this nn website or the following, which is pure OR and bundled for the same reasons:
- List of statoid name changes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 14:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - this website is used as a reference on plenty of Wikipedia articles. That, in itself, is evidence of its notability. Lexicon (talk) 15:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, please not Lexicon is the article's creator. The website may be used but there's no evidence of its notability in RS coverage. Wikipedia links are not notability. It doesn't need an article here for the website to be used. TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 15:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Being considered reliable and being considered notable are two different things. —Quasirandom (talk) 16:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Travellingcari. —Nightstallion 20:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. But Travellingcari didn't say "keep". Phil Bridger (talk) 15:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- strong delete- non-notable site. It doesn't matter if it's used on wikipedia, which is not WP:RS. There need to have been whole articles by proper newspapers written about the site itself. The special, the random, the lovely Merkinsmum 22:06, 7 March 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.