Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winster.com

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 speedy delete as G11. I have no true opposition to someone wanting to try to create an article that establishes notability if they can provide the sources (this was also a borderline A7 candidate), but this article was far too promotional. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:05, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Winster.com[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not enough sourcing to meet the notability guidelines for websites. Kelly ^hi! 09:26, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It's certainly pretty unambiguously promotional, enough to where I'd speedy it under that criteria. It also doesn't help that the paper doesn't mention the site and the CM post only mentions the site briefly. Unless I can find a ton of coverage I'm going to likely speedy delete this as a promotional article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:49, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There were some sources in the article history, namely this ABC link that looks to be a rehashed press release and this post which only mentions the site briefly. There's this SF Gate story that says the site was being shut down, but that's really not even remotely enough to warrant an article. If by some chance there are sources out there, this article would need to be TNT'd first. A search in Highbeam doesn't bring up much either, as the only mentions I can find are brief passing things that would make it a trivial source at best. The article has a definite problem with promotional speak and wording that might have been somewhat OK back in 2010, but is considered inappropriate nowadays. It's not bells and whistles and sparklers in your face promotional, but there are several weasel words interspersed throughout the article. This might have been unintentional, but it's still problematic. The sentence "At Winster.com, the more that players work together, the more they win" is probably one of the best examples of this. If no one objects, I'll delete it as WP:G11. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:02, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Go for the G11 – czar 16:04, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since you're endorsing it and no one has posted here for its inclusion, I'll go ahead and speedy this. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:03, 26 September 2015 (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.