Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T-Shirt Hell

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 keep. Sango123 18:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] T-Shirt Hell

Just an online T-shirt shop. Same as every other T-shirt shop out there Phileas 04:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Well known, notable, has been featured on ABC TV. Crystallina 04:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, no evidence of notability.--Peta 05:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable enough even though it has a news mention (good cite, though). -- Kjkolb 07:23, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep In my limited message board experience, this is popular as a humor site as well as a t-shirt site. It's well-known enough to be notable. Ace of Sevens 09:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, nn website. --Terence Ong 09:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete no evidence of notability. Bwithh 10:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, notable website even without the media mentions in Melbourne's The Age, a segment on a CNN broadcast, and Philadelphia Weekly, among others. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:12, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep I don't like T-Shirt Hell, but it passes WP:WEB. The site has, as shown above, many media references. Its Alexa rank is in the top 5,000 [1], which is certainly high enough for an article, and a huge number of other sites (over 1,600) link to it. The article simply explains what the site is, and does not read like advertising. "T-Shirt Hell" (in quotes) gets 236 thousand Google hits, and if you just Google "t-shirt"- a word that gets over 87 million hits- T-Shirt Hell is the very first link [2]. -- Kicking222 11:50, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - meets WP:WEB per pertinent arguments from Kicking222. definately notable, and verifyable from independant sources. - Peripitus (Talk) 12:38, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Kicking222. Tevildo 12:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep All indications are that this site meets WP:WEB.--208.215.25.131 13:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Kicking222. Voice of Treason 13:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep notable site among t-shirt collectors (I happen to be one) Stev0 15:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Kicking2222. Rob 15:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Kicking222. Reluctantly, it does pass the criteria for such. -- ^Evanx(tag?) 17:54, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, very notable. I'm pretty sure it made the news (at least once) when the owner received a number of death threats last year. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 19:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Notable enough for an article. Deathawk 20:38, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Notable website, also was in the news over the past few years. The main reason i beleive that this article should be kept is because Wiki is supposed to be a network of unbiased facts, so naturally even if you do not agree with the t shirt hell, you should still allow for free information to be circulated user:ryan123004 20:13, 7 June 2006
• Keep per excellent argument raised by badlydrawnjeff and Kicking222 -- Samir धर्म 00:14, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep No doubt notable, and I want to jump on the voting bandwagon here ;-) --Kickstart70-T-C 00:19, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Non-notable my ass. XM 19:48, 12 June 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.