Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DoubleSign

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. — JIP | Talk 04:57, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] DoubleSign

Delete Advertisement PhilipO 22:59, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as per nom. See also the Afd for DoubleSign Astrology. - BorgQueen 23:10, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Question: I followed this example Fotki - are articles about web portal considered an advertisement? --WalterJKin 23:38, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, Fotki has over 2 million hits on Google [1]. "DoubleSign Astrology" has ~600 [2]. There is a serious difference in notability between these two sites. The tone of the article ads nothing but basic information about the site, reads like a low-key advertisement and doesn't demonstrate its particular notablity over any other astrology site. Statements such as

The website is popular among users due to cool images of both Chinese and Western Zodiac Signs, as well as DoubleSigns, daily, bi-weekly and yearly horoscopes (Chinese and Western), descriptions of Zodiac Signs from different point of view, including books, celebrities, love and sex; and Are You Compatible? Calcluator.

are intrinsically promotional. Since you appear to be the creator of the site in question, it is a violation of Wikipedia policy to be creating articles about it [3]. My vote remains at Delete. Cheers --PhilipO 23:47, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, advertising, as is DoubleSign Astrology. User:Zoe|^(talk) 23:43, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

• I would like to replace this entire article about a web portal, with one the describes DoubleSign as astrological term, its meaning and application from astrological point of view. I tried to it yesterday, but the old article (about the portal) was restored.

I restored it because you removed the AFD (Articles for deletion) tag at the top of the page. You will need to re-edit this article without removing this tag. Cheers --PhilipO 15:57, 4 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.