Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OneGoodie.com
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 Delete. (aeropagitica) 21:23, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OneGoodie.com[edit]
A non-notable website that launched less than a month ago. Blatant advertising, but the CSD was challenged. Harro5 23:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I could find no evidence that this web business meets WP:CORP. I found a total of 5 results. The company, according to the article, was created on 21 August 2006. There are no reliable, third-party, online sources. Maybe if the company is extremely successful for a few years it will deserve an article, but right now, it doesn't merit one. Srose (talk) 00:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No data on Alexa, either. It's non-notable. It's definitely advertising and vanity. --Nishkid64 01:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Not notable, less than a month old, not yet. - Richfife 01:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:SPAM. —dustmite 02:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - spam --T-rex 04:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete because it's clearly self-promotion. The article's creator also removed the delete nomination I placed on the article, which doesn't help his/her case. Cordless Larry 09:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Cordless Larry, I apologize for removing the delete nomination, it was purely accidental. This site is very relevant to One Deal a Day websites which are part of a larger business trend. Please see: (Squidoo "One Deal a Day" Lens)
- Comment That's OK, but there's no reason for each website of a movement to have its own Wikipedia article - Richfife 00:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Danny Lilithborne 22:38, 17 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.