| Revision as of 15:03, 11 January 2010 editPanyd (talk | contribs)16,595 edits Keep← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 05:30, 4 February 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (17 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' | |||
| <!--Template:Afd top | |||
| Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> | |||
| The result was '''keep'''. ]<sup>]</sup> 02:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| {{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|W}} | |||
| :{{la|AskMoses.com}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/AskMoses.com}}|2=AfD statistics}}) | :{{la|AskMoses.com}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/AskMoses.com}}|2=AfD statistics}}) | ||
| Line 9: | Line 15: | ||
| *<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the ]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- <span style="border-left: 1px solid #c30;">]</span><sub style="text-shadow: 3px 3px 3px rgba(255,255,0,0.75); color: #c30;">].</sub> 09:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)</small> | *<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the ]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- <span style="border-left: 1px solid #c30;">]</span><sub style="text-shadow: 3px 3px 3px rgba(255,255,0,0.75); color: #c30;">].</sub> 09:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)</small> | ||
| *'''Delete''' - In its current form, it fails to satisfy ] and ] --]<sup>]</sup> 10:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC) | *<s>'''Delete''' - In its current form, it fails to satisfy ] and ] --]<sup>]</sup> 10:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)</s> | ||
| ::'''Keep''' - ] has been achieved through expansion and addition of ] --]<sup>]</sup> 19:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' - There is plenty of coverage of this site in a lot of big newspapers. I've added a few there but there are many more. ]<sup>]</sup> 15:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' - There is plenty of coverage of this site in a lot of big newspapers. I've added a few there but there are many more. ]<sup>]</sup> 15:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Delete''' it's a non-notable website. ] ] 15:54, 11 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| * '''Comment''' if the main problem is lack of reliable sources I'm sure it can be fixed , . ] (]) 18:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' I added a few reliable sources.—] (]) 19:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''': Per the first three references. ] (]) 19:39, 11 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''': A well-used site, covered in lots of press reports. ] (]) 16:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep'''More than adequate reliable sources. Meets ].—] (]) 21:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. Non-notable web-site. It may have gotten some notice from news due to its oddness but I feel it passes ] only on a technicality. A chunk of the article also violates ].] (]) 09:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' Sufficient saources to show notability. ] (]) 15:21, 16 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' based on ] only. If that is not a good reason, delete. --] (]) 00:15, 17 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :It's not a particlarly good reason, no – could you be more specific about what you think rather than what that essay says? <span style="border-left: 1px solid #c30;">]</span><sub style="text-shadow: 3px 3px 3px rgba(255,255,0,0.75); color: #c30;">].</sub> 00:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' as it's informative, which is what an encyclopedia is about.--] (]) 19:05, 17 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div> | |||
Latest revision as of 05:30, 4 February 2022
- 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. Jayjg 02:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
AskMoses.com
- AskMoses.com (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Online chatroom and religious advice service.
Since its creation in 2006, this article has never contained an assertion of notability nor reason why this website is notable. A speedy was declined on the basis that "it gets a reasonable number of Google Books hits". There are currently 22 of these, none (as far as I can see, some are restricted access) covering the subject in any depth. pablohablo. 09:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. -- pablohablo. 09:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Delete - In its current form, it fails to satisfy WP:NOTE and WP:RS --nsaum75 10:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - WP:NOTE has been achieved through expansion and addition of WP:RS --nsaum75 19:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - There is plenty of coverage of this site in a lot of big newspapers. I've added a few there but there are many more. Panyd 15:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
- Delete it's a non-notable website. Yossiea 15:54, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
- Comment if the main problem is lack of reliable sources I'm sure it can be fixed , . M0RD00R (talk) 18:32, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
- Comment I added a few reliable sources.—Sandahl (♀) 19:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep: Per the first three references. Joe Chill (talk) 19:39, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep: A well-used site, covered in lots of press reports. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 16:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- KeepMore than adequate reliable sources. Meets WP:WEB.—Sandahl (♀) 21:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- Delete. Non-notable web-site. It may have gotten some notice from news due to its oddness but I feel it passes Notability (web) only on a technicality. A chunk of the article also violates Misplaced Pages:NOT#INTERNET.Joe407 (talk) 09:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Sufficient saources to show notability. Edward321 (talk) 15:21, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep based on WP:OTHERSTUFF only. If that is not a good reason, delete. --Shuki (talk) 00:15, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- It's not a particlarly good reason, no – could you be more specific about what you think rather than what that essay says? pablohablo. 00:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep as it's informative, which is what an encyclopedia is about.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 19:05, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- 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.