Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hotels.com (2nd nomination)

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. Stifle (talk) 10:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hotels.com[edit]

Non-notable+Advertising Travelbrit (talk) 20:46, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you might have more luck with "non-notable". Canvasback (talk) 21:05, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I strongly suspect they're notable as I remember their prime time commercials a few years ago. I'll change to keep if I can come up with some sources. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see their adds all the time. Keep if secondary reliable sources can be found. If not merge to article on parent company. Steve Dufour (talk) 00:04, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep Major travel site with a heavy promotional presence on the web, in print, and on television, and part of Barry Diller's web empire. Certainly a candidate for expansion, but far from deletion in any sense. Nate • (chatter) 00:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, they're a fairly major booking site. Tempshill (talk) 00:28, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Large hotel booking site, not really sure why it's so small though... Renaissancee (talk) 00:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - No sources to suggest notability. Just because they advertise doesn't mean they meet WP:CORP. Rwiggum (^Talk/_Contrib) 02:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Multiple reliable sources here. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 02:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the Hammer man, it looks like there actually are sources for this one, they just need to be added to the article. JBsupreme (talk) 06:22, 29 April 2009 (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.