Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quizlet

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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 03:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quizlet

Quizlet (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Page fails Wikipedia:Notability (web) criteria, does not appear to have multiple published works or won any awards. Philip Gronowski ^Contribs 00:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

As I mentioned on this article's talk page, I do think that this article meats notability requirements. This page discuses a website of fairly significant importance; though made public a mere month ago, Quizlet has more than 6,000 users. It has been mentioned in two Lifehacker posts, a quite popular blog, and included on del.icio.us's popular list. Quizlet was also mentioned on ajaxian.com, digg.com, decrem.com, macmegasite.com, screeniac.com, webware.com, fortysomething.ca, and other sites. Further, Quizlet's creator, Andrew Sutherland, made an appearance at Stirr, discussing Quizlet, to much popularity. The article's initial speedy deletion tag was added, as was also stated on the article's talk page, before much of the details were added. » K i G O E | talk 00:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Still, in my opinion, a non-notable website.--Anthony.bradbury 00:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Being mentioned by other sources does not count - policy states the subject has to be the subject of a nontrivial work. Natalie 02:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Weak delete per nom. --Gwern (contribs) 05:49 14 February 2007 (GMT) 05:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Notability is not established, and blogs are not credible sources. Fundamental Dan 15:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Delete This seems like a good article but it does fail WP:NN.Tellyaddict^{Editor review!} 16:57, 14 February 2007 (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.