Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Britlist

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. The only keep votes are by a user whose only contributions ever are to this AfD debate. — JIP | Talk 16:16, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Britlist

Non-notable website. Few google hits (39 unique), Alexa ranking stops just short of 500,000. Little more than advertising. Francs2000 17:20, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. One of many such sites in the UK that linkfarm to boost their Google rating. Hence, lots of Google results, but only around 40 unique hits. Nothing unique about this site to jstify it's inclusion. --GraemeL ^(talk) 17:57, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
• Keep article. It's not actually link farming that gives them so many google results - it's the fact that they have so many unique pages. A lot of the results are a combination of the number of sections and towns that they cover. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.6.234.29 (talk • contribs) 22:39, 16 November 2005
• Delete. I responded to a message yesterday on the help desk from Timp of Britlist wondering what had happened to an article he had posted. I checked the records and noticed that we had an article created by Tim Patterson of November 9 and I assume that Tim P of Britlist and Tim Patterson are one and the same. I did a search and discovered 109,000 hits so I put a notice on the UK Wikipedians notice board talk page see [[1]]. The general concensus was that this was of little value and should be listed. Further, there were only 39 unique hits for this company and it fails to meet WP:CORP. Capitalistroadster 18:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete For reasons above Maccoinnich 16:54, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
• Don't delete I'd keep the article on the site - this site's big in the UK and is used by a lot of people for buying and selling who don't like to pay the fees on ebay. It's also nominated for website of the year 2005. Website of the year —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.6.234.29 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 16 November 2005
  • Note: you only get to vote once, and unregistered users don't get a vote at all. Just to let you know. -- Francs2000 01:44, 17 November 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.