Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OldVersion.com (2nd nomination)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 No consensus, default to keep. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 10:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- OldVersion.com (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
No references. If we delete what isn't referenced, we end up with an empty, sub-stub article. The article hasn't been referenced since inception, really. There's no evidence of meeting WP:WEB for notability. Mikeblas (talk) 02:19, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:WEB. If it wasn't for the previous AfD this would be a WP:CSD#A7 candidate. Jfire (talk) 05:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No significant coverage from independent sources Corpx (talk) 11:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Uncertain. I vaguely remember reading about this website in a computer magazine or newspaper, but I don't remember where. Would need more research to see if it is possible to find media mentions of it that might help establish notability. --Itub (talk) 18:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep or merge -- possibly to somewhere like archive site or history of application software. The archive, notable in itself for uniqueness and survival, just happens to have a web-page format; its notability as a repository does not necessarily depend on the guidelines for the average web-sit-- A respectable link/review appears at http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,1162680,00.asp -- Pedant17 (talk) 01:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. The 72-word "article" at pcmag.com isn't exactly substantial, per WP:N. The current article is completely uncited; WP:V, we're to remove such material, not relocate it. -- Mikeblas (talk) 02:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, numerous sources available from Google News Archive including the Wall Street Journal and National Review in addition to "industry" publications. --Dhartung | Talk 05:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Dhartung; great job! Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 01:07, 8 February 2008 (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.