Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/6park (2nd nomination)

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 keep. John254 02:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 6park

6park (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

does not assert notability. Going through AFD because it can't be speedied Will ^(talk) 02:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

• This is the 259th most popular website in the world, according to an indicator with an English-speaking bias. [1] Should that be included in the article? Shii (tock) 02:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

  Would help, yes. The site could be in the top 5 on Alexa, but without asserting its notability, it's A7 material. Will ^(talk) 03:00, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

  That is false. Look at WP:CSD#A7 again: "An article about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from questions of notability, verifiability and reliability of sources." --Pixelface (talk) 19:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

• Strong Keep. Ludicrously popular site among Chinese expatriates. I see it once or twice a day myself on other computers during classes. The Alexa rank of the site in question this week is 259, down 40 from last week. 1.24 million ghits. I would certainly hope that something like this couldn't be speedy deleted just because the article is in terrible shape. Also, when discussing notability, you have to remember that this is a site in Chinese only, with a strongly anti-government and anti-authority view on their country. You aren't likely to find many news articles on it, as it is a Chinese culture-oriented webiste, and news articles on this subject would be produced by a Chinese news agency, but Chinese news agencies are highly censored; hell, they can't even edit Wikipedia. We're talking about a site that gets over in the range of 2000 million hits a day. I think pulling out IAR for the lack of sources is sufficient in this case and an improvement drive by english-speaking users of the site is in order. Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 02:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. The Alexa ranking strongly suggests notability. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:32, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
• Comment: It is also the 10th most popular site in New Zealand and the 22nd in Singapore, according to Alexa. Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 05:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
• Comment: Also, media coverage, after a fashion. The linked article suggests the site as a way to contact Chinese people living overseas. Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 20:00, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, it appears to be a very popular website. And it has been covered in the Chinese newspaper Hua Sheng Online. I don't think the lack of English sources means very much. --Pixelface (talk) 20:08, 21 March 2008 (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.