Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sex2ube

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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 00:31, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sex2ube

Website has not received independent news coverage; the only references given refer to a press release reprinted on two adult industry news sites. Alexa rank 112,888. Criteria of WP:WEB are not fulfilled. AxelBoldt (talk) 18:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nn and merge any useful content at YouTube or better at one of its sex-related knock-offs. JJL (talk) 22:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, seems like wisely worded advertisement. -RiverHockey (talk) 00:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete non-notable, non-encyclopedic, basically advertisement. — Noah¢s (Talk) 01:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom LonelyBeacon (talk) 07:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletions. -- the wub "?!" 13:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Merge if Pornotube and YouTube have their own sites I fail to see why this website shouldn't. The Pornotube article, for example, contains less information and is not AfD. Either keep them all or merge them into one article. --.Tom. (talk) 14:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Youtube is a huge network, Sex2ube is miniscule, as for pornotube I've never heard of it, so I can't say. Perhaps it should be proposed for deletion as well. -RiverHockey (talk) 20:26, 29 November 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.