| Revision as of 19:39, 11 January 2010 editSL93 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers78,599 edits →AskMoses.com← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:28, 12 January 2010 edit undoYehoishophot Oliver (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,215 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| *'''Comment''' I added a few reliable sources.—] (]) 19:31, 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''': 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) | |||
Revision as of 16:28, 12 January 2010
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 - 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)