Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pork Stories

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 Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pork Stories[edit]

Contested prod. Web collection of stories, published in 2008, of questionable notability. A google search on "Pork Stories" with "Fratire" returns just two hits. Roleplayer (talk) 21:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Some of the sources in the article do not seem to mention the subject at all, and do nothing to help notability. The Huffington Post articles Misogyny For Sale: The New "Frat-Lit" Trend [1] and Pass the Beer: In Defense of "Fratire" [2] have no mention whatsoever of the website, just "fratire" in general. Neither does the FT article The return of the real man do so [3] (a glance at that article indicated the subject to be something entirely unrelated). My attempts to search for any substantial coverage about the website have been fruitless. The website does not pass WP:WEB at all, not even by a long shot, and adding sources which do not verify the subject of the article does not help either. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Despite the protestations of two users on the talk page ^{(who obviously aren't the same person or related to the site at all)}, one of which claiming that it gets thousands of hits a day, Alexa suggests it has a rank of 11,528,221. Which is ten and a half million worse (lower? higher?) than a forum I frequent with just ten active users, and ~5 posts a day. Blatantly not notable. Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 08:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- -- pb30<talk> 14:41, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Yeah this is pretty clearly spam/vandalism. 66.215.247.21 (talk) 00:31, 2 March 2008 (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.