Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mibbit: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:46, 2 May 2009

Mibbit

Hello, I am the user behind the ip 173.66.142.225. My PROD of this article was removed as vandalism. I would like to nominate this article because it has insufficient sources to indicate that this subject passes WP:WEB and there has been insufficient coverage of this to indicate that it is notable. I would also like to note that this article was created by a single purpose account and another user who has been spam username blocked. Myownusername (talk) 19:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

— Myownusername (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 20:20, 2 May 2009 (UTC).[reply]
— 173.66.142.225 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 20:20, 2 May 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Keep. It has three sources which are perfectly sufficient. Ironholds (talk) 19:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete at this time. Of the "three sources", one is obviously good (CNET), one is questionable (Ajaxian, a blog, I'm not familiar with whether it really carries any weight), and one doesn't count at all (the app's page at the iPhone store is essentially a first party source and makes no assertion of notability,, all it proves is that this is an iPhone app; not all iPhone apps are notable). So we're left with, at most, 1.5 sources. I don't believe that 5 paragraphs in CNET and a blog entry demonstrate that this meets WP:N or WP:WEB. Add a few more sources and I'd be inclined to keep. Oren0 (talk) 20:06, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, and maybe this is just me, but the article in its current form reads a little bit like an advertisement. Oren0 (talk) 20:27, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not have "significant coverage" in reliable sources as required by WP:N. ukexpat (talk) 20:18, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I looked for sources to possibly expand this for DYK, and found only the sources in the article. Good luck.... Synergy 20:24, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. Just wanted to point out that chatzilla sux, use pidgin. Gurch (talk) 20:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Per Oren0 and Ukexpat.— Dæ dαlus^Contribs 21:04, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and heavily revise. CNET is a major source and the blog Ajaxian is a legitimate tech news source with scores of professional-quality articles. The Webmonkey mention (in "Further Reading") is arguably a third, but it's marginal. I agree we should not count the product pages. We have two strong sources and one weak source; if we could just find a better third source this would be a strong keep. As for the writing, that is obviously in need of improvement, but quality is no reason to delete as opposed to revising. -moritheil^Talk 21:12, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 :{{la|Mibbit}} (<span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Mibbit|wpReason={{urlencode: [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mibbit]]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mibbit|View AfD]])</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2009 May 2#{{anchorencode:Mibbit}}|View log]])</noinclude>
-Hello, I am the user behind the ip 173.66.142.225. My PROD of this article was removed as vandalism. I would like to nominate this article because it has insufficient sources to indicate that this subject passes WP:WEB. I would also like to note that this article was created by a single purpose account and another user who has been spam username blocked. [[User:Myownusername|Myownusername]] ([[User talk:Myownusername|talk]]) 19:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
+Hello, I am the user behind the ip 173.66.142.225. My PROD of this article was removed as vandalism. I would like to nominate this article because it has insufficient sources to indicate that this subject passes WP:WEB and there has been insufficient coverage of this to indicate that it is notable. I would also like to note that this article was created by a single purpose account and another user who has been spam username blocked. [[User:Myownusername|Myownusername]] ([[User talk:Myownusername|talk]]) 19:16, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 <small>— [[User:Myownusername|Myownusername]] ([[User talk:Myownusername|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Myownusername|contribs]]) has made [[Wikipedia:Single-purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic. {{ #if: 20:20, 2 May 2009 | The preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment was added at 20:20, 2 May 2009 (UTC).}}</small><br /><small>— [[User:173.66.142.225|173.66.142.225]] ([[User talk:173.66.142.225|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/173.66.142.225|contribs]]) has made [[Wikipedia:Single-purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic. {{ #if: 20:20, 2 May 2009 | The preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment was added at 20:20, 2 May 2009 (UTC).}}</small>