Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sunatori.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 Delete. Kirill Lokshin 03:45, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sunatori.com

Advertising. Delete. Andrew pmk | Talk 01:16, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as an ad. Devotchka 01:19, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep due to the importance in engineering and technology/science. (unsigned by 24.201.105.251)
• Keep Canuck 01:54, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
  • By the way, 24.201.105.251 is the poster of the article, and Canuck is an apparent sock-puppet by same IP. Devotchka 02:11, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: it's also a copyvio. -- Kjkolb 02:07, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
• Note. User:24.201.105.251 who created this advertising article has twice removed the AfD tag. I left a note on his talk page prior to the second removal but he may not have seen it. What's the procedure if he removes the AfD tag again? I don't want to get into a 3RR situation Moriori 02:17, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. An advertisement.—Bitmappity 02:35, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete ad -- NSLE _{(Communicate!)} ^<Contribs> 02:47, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as copyvio per Kjkolb. --JJay 02:55, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy under A8. Uploader has been notified. Alphax ^τεχ 05:52, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as copyvio, or delete as advertising if their legal department releases the text under the GFDL. Certainly not a speedy; how they could conceivably be mistaken for a commercial content provider is beyond me. (You also forgot to blank the content.) —Cryptic (talk) 07:11, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Have you read the criteria? It's a copyvio detected within 48 hours, so it's definately speediable. And yes, I should have blanked it. Alphax ^τεχ 07:17, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Yes, I have read the criteria. You clearly have not. How is this a commercial content provider? —Cryptic (talk) 11:35, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, and speedy if possible. - 09:22, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as copyvio. --Optichan 15:56, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete advertising (copyright violation seems to be an indirect justification) CarbonCopy 19:46, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete ads and vanity.--->Newyorktimescrossword 19:23, 29 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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.