Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry's Place
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 of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 00:28, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Archive of previous VFD (how did this pass?) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry's Place2
Obvious vanity/advertisement, not notable Skrewler 09:24, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Harry's what? --Timecop 14:42, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No attempt has been made to establish notability. TheMadBaron 15:05, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Blatant vanity, advertisement, non-noteable. --KirkJohnson
- Delete -- Femmina 22:42, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. According to Alexa, my personal homepage has almost twice as many page views. Without details on how its founders may be notable outside of this blog or on how it might influence other people and/or websites, I don’t think its sole existence is notable enough. Just another opinion website. Sam Hocevar 22:48, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, not notable. --supers 23:21, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Not encyclopedic. Incognito 23:55, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Waste of time. --Impi.za 00:22, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. 65.34.232.136 02:58, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Non-notable blog. —Cleared as filed. 11:36, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I've never heard of this 'Harry's Place' shit, and nor do I ever want to again. Non-notable, worthless garbage. --86.2.56.178 12:12, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose listing. This was only removed from AfD 6 days ago. Angela. 12:32, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- There were only 2 votes last time, I can't tell but it may have been ended early also. -Skrewler 12:43, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Angela, it certainly falls within administrator discretion to relist nominations with extremely low participation. Titoxd(?!?) 04:09, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Not notable, I don't think it will be a few days from now either. Vanity. --Depakote 12:41, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nn blog. Dottore So 13:15, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete How the hell did this survive its previous AfD listing? Someone tell me, please. Whoever voted keep last time should hang their heads in shame. Reyk 01:26, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I hate jumped-up-charlie, "look at me, I'm on Wikipedia", self-referential blogshite as much as the next guy... nay, much more than the next guy. Unfortunately, a very little internet research shows: Alexa is 110,806, which isn't great but isn't bad, Google shows that it's made it into the gaurdian um ,twice and was even nominated by them for the Backbencher's political weblog awards. Thus, as this is not a vote every entry with "not notable" is just a waste of photons, methink. - brenneman(t)(c) 10:22, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, ok guys, had your fun yet? --Daniel11 02:01, 20 November 2005 (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.