User talk:Psb

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Suite101.com, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Suite101.com. You may remove the {{dated prod}} template, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.

See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#Suite101 dot com --Suite101 has been added to the Wikimedia global spam blacklist for all Wikipedia foundation projects in all languages.

Cheers. --A. B. 19:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suite101.com AfD

An article that you have been involved in editing, Suite101.com, has been listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suite101.com. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in whether it should be deleted. Thank you. --A. B. 22:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:CORP, WP:V and WP:RS -- if reliable sources can provide evidence of notability, then the article should be retained. In the meantime, I've nominated it for deletion.

--A. B. 22:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Suite101-com.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Suite101-com.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJ^Talk 06:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suite101

Thanks for your note. I looked at the source for the deleted version and it does not appear to me that the site meets WP:WEB, the notability criteria for internet sites, at this time. Will Beback talk 15:24, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will, thanks for your reply -- could you be more specific about why you think the site doesn't meet notability criteria? The site is both very popular and meets the criteria: high profile media like National Post, Süddeutsche Zeitung, Spiegel, Miami Herald and a larger number of specialized publications have covered the site with larger features. Additionally, the article was suggested to be a re-post of an old (thus "Speedy Delivery"), deleted article - this is not true, it was a completely different article. Please re-instate. Psb (talk) 20:17, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see those sources in the deleted article. I suggest you take the best sources you can find and draft an article based on those at User talk:Psb/draft. If it looks like it meets WP:WEB then restoring it shouldn't be too controversial. Will Beback talk 20:31, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will, could you point me to where the deleted article resides? I can't find it; would be happy to add the required information. Thank you! Psb (talk) 23:20, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]