Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nwowatcher

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. (aeropagitica) 05:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nwowatcher[edit]

Delete nn website/discussion forum with an alexa ranking of 1,180,269. [1] The creator of the article goes by the same name of the website and uses his user page solely to advertise the site which indicates self-promotion. The article itself states that: The forum was created in June, 2004 as an independent offshoot of the Alex Jones Prison Planet forums i.e., it is a minor discussion forum. [2]--Jersey Devil 22:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Recury 23:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Cannot find wher this meets WP:WEB :) Dlohcierekim 19:41, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, yup, self-promotion. Funny how many people confused Wikipedia with MySpace. --Jaysweet 19:43, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
comment i was on my way to say "delete", but i took a look and the forums seem quite large and active... what are the criteria for notability for this kinds of things? --Striver 15:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not exactly certain... but one thing very much going against this article is that it reads like a promotional blurb for the site. Wikipedia does not explicitly prohibit people from creating pages about themselves, their company, or their organization -- although I personally think they should (explicitly prohibiting such edits would save so much wasted AfD time...). However, I would argue that if the site is notable enough for inclusion, then someone not directly attempting to promote the site would be willing to write an article about it. As written, I don't think the article is okay; it is too self-promoting. A rewrite might make it valid... but I'm guessing it's not notable enough to find an unaffiliated person to do a rewrite :D --Jaysweet 17:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:WEB on all three prongs. Has not been the subject of independent non-trivial media coverage, has won no apparent awards, and does not have its content distributed through a well-known source. It's just too small to be notable. --Hyperbole 00:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Deleteper above--Peephole 22:29, 8 September 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.