Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/YaHooka

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. No sources, no keepy. — Coren ^(talk) 22:41, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

YaHooka

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

Can't find anything that shows this to be really notable, other than forums. Cloudbound (talk) 22:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 00:06, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep It is referred to a lot by various websites (mainly pot alternative lifestyle related, as well as forums - gets 129,000 hits on Google. However, article could do with better references. Deathlibrarian (talk) 01:21, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Conditional" delete. The website does appear known, but not necessarily notable; at any rate, it doesn't currently meet Wikipedia:Reliable Sources and the current refs aren't exactly what's required. If RS's can be found, this is a definite keep. dci | TALK 01:49, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Coverage only appears to relate to the controversy around the name being similar to Yahoo, which isn't enough for an encyclopedia article. --Michig (talk) 10:31, 9 December 2012 (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.