Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fandalism

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 was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. plicit 23:49, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fandalism[edit]

Fandalism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NCORP for not receiving significant coverage. Only 3 sources ([1] [2] [3]) could reasonably be considered to provide 'significant coverage' of the website. Two other TechCrunch articles ([4] [5]) have it as a topic, but not at a depth to be considered significant. Anything else online is merely a passing mention of its existence. (Amusingly, one mention was from a news article about four murders.) SWinxy (talk) 21:05, 11 March 2022 (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.