Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 July 27

The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.

Deleted too quick, discussion was not finished and there was no consensus. DeliciousInternetSpeeds 08:44, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This, after filing of this DRV, is highly misleading and casts significant doubt on whether this is a good faith nomination (I wouldn't be surprised if the nominator, a SPA and the article creator, has an undisclosed COI or is UPE). Comments after relisting (which excludes the "deleted too quick" scenario) show the sources you provided do not establish notability, therefore it was deleted. You, yourself, admitted the page was non-notable ("this type of article seems particularly tricky to me due to the lack of actual press"). MER-C 12:27, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse "deleted too quick" is clearly not the case, the debate was open for over two weeks and AfDs only have to be open for one week. "Discussion was not finished" is also wrong, the debate hasn't received a new comment in the best part of a week when it was closed. Regarding the debate itself, the Delete side reviewed the provided sources and didn't think they were sufficient, and they gave reasonable justification. Superastig's comment says that the subject meets the GNG because it has coverage in reliable sources, the GNG is actually stricter than that. I don't think that debate could have been closed any other way. Hut 8.5 18:43, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong endorse. This could not have been closed any other way. Consensus for deletion was clear, and the time allotted for discussion was generous. BD2412 T 19:11, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DeliciousInternetSpeeds listed six sources. Naypta 11:10, 22 June 2020, correctly rebutted them. None support notability.

Analysing each:

1. a guide for best dns servers, Does not mention NextDNS

3. a linux news site, Discussion site, development announcement, not useful for notability.

ASTIG 10:39, 22 June 2020 dropped a very weak !vote, discountable. Driveby !voting that sources exist, without detailing any sources, is not helpful.

Naypta and HighKing were convincing, DeliciousInternetSpeeds and ASTIG were not.

--SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:57, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse - The reasonable conclusion by the closer. As to not allowing enough time, one relisting is enough time. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:26, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse, closure adequately reflects consensus. Discussion was open for 17 days; the minimum is seven. Stifle (talk) 16:28, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse There was a consensus and there was plenty of time for the discussion since it was relisted. SportingFlyer T·C 20:30, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.