Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicktoons World Online

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 semi-speedy delete. Major contributor requested deletion [1], and nobody other than a brand new user wanted to keep it. -- Steel 11:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nicktoons World Online[edit]

Site less than three months old, most of the history is has its first ad, adds a chat box, etc. Related pages have been deleted before. Seems to be an advert for a Nickelodeon spin-off. Delete, maybe even speedy for advert and lack of notability. Chris 73 | Talk 17:53, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete For now As of now, not that notable...however I can see the article being relevant when the site gets a little older and more prominant. Gan fon 20:05, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This may be the article creator speaking, but I really enjoy this site. It is not a spin-off, but I personally know the site owner/creator. They have big plans and a great amount of members. I know it is going to be huge, while not much now, it will grow to a great yet kid-safe community! Please reconsider keeping my article, GGX (creator of site) would be greatly dissapointed. Thank you. Dphantom15 23:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Your personal connections with this site as your reasoning to 'keep' this article blatantly says there is no reason this article should be in an encyclopedia. -- Wikipedical 21:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not yet a notable site. If it becomes one in the future, article may be recreated at that time. Fan-1967 23:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This place is still growing in member size and plans for the future. What is a notable site, anyway? A site that's extremely popular amongst the internet surfers? In my opinion, no site can get popular without the help of other sources. ShadowColtz
- — ShadowColtz (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. .
Delete, no evidence from WP:RS of notability per WP:WEB. Those suggesting to keep are asked to cite policies and guidelines in support of their recommendation... really enjoying the site and having big plans are not criteria for inclusion, and furthermore Wikipedia is not a medium for boosting the popularity of this or any other site. --Kinu ^t/_c 21:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious Delete per nom, per WP:WEB. More like advertising to me. -- Wikipedical 21:42, 15 January 2007 (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.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mecu (talk • contribs) 14:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]