Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/VirtualMalaysia.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 delete. I have considered the redirect option, but there is no consensus for it, runs counter to normal practice for redirects, and the suggested target article does not cover it beyond it being in the "External links" section. Sjakkalle (Check!) 18:37, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

VirtualMalaysia.com[edit]

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

fails WP:NWEB. I could find no indepth coverage. for example looking at Malaysia's biggest English language newspaper. [1] LibStar (talk) 05:55, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. hmssolent^lambast _{patrol records} 06:32, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I find these sometimes silly - virtualmalaysia.com is the official website of an organisation. The organisation has a wikipedia page - then that is the place to report the website (it is generally listed as the official homepage, and all information about what the organisation represents is there as well on the wikipedia page). No need to have also a wikipedia page for the website, that is just a form of extra promotion of the website. In principle: merge into the mainpage, practically: delete (no redirect, that would help the promotion of the website, and is utterly unnecessary). --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 07:26, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I agree with Dirk Beetstra, the existing page Ministry of Tourism (Malaysia) says all that need be said about the organisation, and there is no call for a separate page on their website. Let's hope they are not themselves responsible for this piece of pointless spamming. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:51, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, Chiswick Chap, it appears differently - see note below. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 14:00, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the Spam WikiProject discussions --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 14:00, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to hear that, but it seems our !votes are correct. I've added the link to the tourism ministry's webpage. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:04, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:49, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Ministry of Tourism (Malaysia). Fails WP:WEB fairly comprehensively, as outlined above, but redirects are cheap. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:21, 18 January 2014 (UTC).[reply]

It doesn't matter how cheap it is, organisations should not be using Wikipedia to advertise their websites. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:21, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I wonder whether this would be a 'reasonable' redirect - is this something that people would search for on Wikipedia and hence should be redirected, or should it just come up in the search results in the Search engine of Wikipedia - I vote for the latter. No redirect. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 13:40, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why would they, if they were looking for tourist information or for the tourist ministry? No, it's just the name of an advertising website, not a sensible search term. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:52, 18 January 2014 (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.