Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prisonplanet.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The result of the debate was speedy keep as nomination was withdrawn. FCYTravis 07:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Prisonplanet.com

is vanity and advertisment; should be put into ext links in 9/11 conspiracy theories if anything. - Jjjsixsix ^(talk)/_(contribs) @ 06:29, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I concede. -- Jjjsixsix ^(talk)/_(contribs) @ 06:34, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I should know better, though the website itself doesn't look, professional, per say, enough; sorry to Striver, this was a somewhat but not really improper action on my part caused by a misunderstanding. On this basis, I vote to keep on an article I nominated for AfD. Again, sorry for my stupidity, and hopefully I have not violated WP:NPA on myself. Thanks. -- Jjjsixsix ^(talk)/_(contribs) @ 06:54, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Its ok brother, im sure you acted in good faith to ensure WP keeps a high standard. Have a good day! --Striver 07:04, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

• Keep This is not vanity. Its a effort to represent a website with more than 2 million paying subscribers. Alex Jones is a well known Journalist. Not agreeing with its views does not warant a deletion, much less serious web-sites have their own article in WP. The site has a rank of 11 000 making it notable. Please do not remove Alexia stats. --Striver 06:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Information on sources should not be deleted. zen master T 06:46, 21 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.