Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zelaron

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. Punkmorten 09:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zelaron[edit]

NN web forum. 48 unique google hits [1] IslaySolomon 16:35, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, fails to establish notability per WP:WEB. --Alan Au 21:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notable on Alexa.com as a worldwide top 500,000 web site listed by popularity, with 96 unique web sites linking to it. Also noted in print in German gaming magazine Gamestar as the possible source of the still unsolved "leak" of the Doom 3 alpha. Also noted on numerous high-traffic news sites.

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/main?q=Zelaron&url=http://www.zelaron.com/

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=6067

http://www.dvhardware.net/article890.html

http://www.ferrago.com/story/696

http://www.gamestar.de

Does anyone care to investigate the situation further, and add relevant links to the article? -- Zelaron 22:15, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Unfortunately, there are problems with WP:COI and WP:VANITY as well. --Alan Au 00:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Being in the top 500,000 asserts absolutely zero importance. If Wikipedia had pages for the top 500,000 web sites, it would have about 490,000 more articles. -- Kicking222 04:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Deathphoenix ʕ 03:36, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Low Google, low Alexa (~430,000), no notability. -- Kicking222 04:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the most self-defeating argument for notability I've seen in a long time. Opabinia regalis 04:06, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I was thinking the exact same thing as Opabinia regalis. Resolute 04:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. MER-C 04:30, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. User:Zelaron makes a good point, but the forum still doesn't seem quite notable enough. Oh, and the article should actually link to the forum. JIP | Talk 05:45, 5 October 2006 (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.