| Revision as of 18:09, 18 November 2007 editEaolson (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,653 editsm minor refactor← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:10, 18 November 2007 edit undoRklawton (talk | contribs)Administrators40,714 edits →Dawdle: replyNext edit → | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| * '''Keep'''. My only problem is that I browse though your articles and many are less notable than this. So i don't see why this can't fall in that catagory or higher. If you delete this i feel that wikipedia needs to go through all their articles becuase there notability is not high either too.] (]) 18:06, 18 November 2007 (UTC) | * '''Keep'''. My only problem is that I browse though your articles and many are less notable than this. So i don't see why this can't fall in that catagory or higher. If you delete this i feel that wikipedia needs to go through all their articles becuase there notability is not high either too.] (]) 18:06, 18 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :also its a stub so stubs i don't feel go under the notability rules as much becuase more could be added.] (]) 18:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC) | :also its a stub so stubs i don't feel go under the notability rules as much becuase more could be added.] (]) 18:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
| **'''Reply''' - please make a list of these articles as you find them. I will be happy to delete them as well. ] (]) 18:10, 18 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' per everything above. The author seems to think that "notability" is something that refers to the article rather than its subject. ] (]) 18:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' per everything above. The author seems to think that "notability" is something that refers to the article rather than its subject. ] (]) 18:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 18:10, 18 November 2007
Dawdle
Nom - speedied several times. Fails WP:CORP and WP:WEB. This new website simply isn't notable. However, its creator doesn't seem to "get it", so I thought an AfD might provide a more suitable forum for the discussion. Rklawton (talk) 17:49, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - Fails to claim notability, and the only references are brief press releases stating the company was launched. Jeodesic (talk) 17:59, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - The sources are not reliable. They are either social networking website or non notable press releases which are just advertising about Dawdle (WP:WEB - Exceptions)----NAHID 18:04, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. My only problem is that I browse though your articles and many are less notable than this. So i don't see why this can't fall in that catagory or higher. If you delete this i feel that wikipedia needs to go through all their articles becuase there notability is not high either too.Emargul (talk) 18:06, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- also its a stub so stubs i don't feel go under the notability rules as much becuase more could be added.Emargul (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Reply - please make a list of these articles as you find them. I will be happy to delete them as well. Rklawton (talk) 18:10, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per everything above. The author seems to think that "notability" is something that refers to the article rather than its subject. eaolson (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2007 (UTC)