Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soundclick.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 of the debate was merge and redirect. Done. Ifnord 14:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Soundclick.com

Delete and merge with SoundClick. Kenneth Nishimoto 00:25, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete and merge as per nominator. Sycthos^Talk 03:05, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Merge, obviously. And redirect is useful, to avoid recreation if nothing else. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-20 08:27Z
• Merge and redirect is the obvious answer. Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 09:55, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I created the SoundClick article (and the Soundclick redirect) without realizing that there was already a Soundclick.com article. I apologize for the duplication. However you choose to merge the articles is fine by me. (BTW, the company's official name is SoundClick, Inc.) archola 12:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC) (I am also Vanilla Shadoe on SoundClick)

Thanks for the info. I would choose "SoundClick" as the article title since that is how the website (and presumably others) refers to use for itself. Contrast mp3.com, which is primarily known as "mp3.com" and not "mp3", and amazon.com, whose official company name includes the ".com". I wouldn't choose "SoundClick, Inc", as both articles are about the website, only mentioning the company. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-22 20:28Z

• Merge and redirect. This doesn't need to be on AFD. -- Jake 05:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

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.