Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cobalt Agent
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Mailer Diablo 02:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cobalt Agent
Dubious claims to notability; however, really nothing there. James084 03:00, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --Hansnesse 03:03, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Speedydelete.A7:non-notable individual. GeorgeStepanek\talk 03:23, 19 February 2006 (UTC)- Delete Traffic Rank for cobaltagent.com: 4,483,702 --Ruby 03:27, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- source it or kill it --CyclePat 03:38, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. PJM 03:56, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - I have removed the speedy tag, as the article is about the website rather than the eponymous author. Agree that the article needs sources indicating notability or should be deleted. -- Jonel | Speak 04:12, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --Terence Ong 04:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --Kinu t/c 06:10, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Megaplx 10:13, 19 February 2006 (UTC) Sources have been added throughout the article and references are at the bottom of the page.
- But sadly it is still not notable. GeorgeStepanek\talk 07:47, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Megaplx 10:13, 19 February 2006 (UTC) So a website like www.angrypatrioticbastard.com wouldn't be notable because it isn't in the top 100,000?
-
- The problem I see is that the reference section just doesn't make sense to me. Follow WP:CITE... And unfortunatelly, this seems to be an inherent problem for most articles here at AFD. If we simply put ""unsourced"" and guided new commer to wikipedia we would be developing a friendlier place. And we would be making much more productive and credible articles. The links that are provided, I feel, are no different than linking to google and then saying "search." It is imparitive to have a well sourced article. After that... you have to deal with notability. Obviously if your article is well sourced this shouldn't be so bad. However some less notable people have been removed from wiki. Good luck! --CyclePat 20:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I agree that a deletion nomination is not the way to make a friendly wikipedia. However, citation issues aside, the article needs to meet Wikipedia:Notability (websites). --Hansnesse 20:42, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- The problem I see is that the reference section just doesn't make sense to me. Follow WP:CITE... And unfortunatelly, this seems to be an inherent problem for most articles here at AFD. If we simply put ""unsourced"" and guided new commer to wikipedia we would be developing a friendlier place. And we would be making much more productive and credible articles. The links that are provided, I feel, are no different than linking to google and then saying "search." It is imparitive to have a well sourced article. After that... you have to deal with notability. Obviously if your article is well sourced this shouldn't be so bad. However some less notable people have been removed from wiki. Good luck! --CyclePat 20:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete - page appears to be nothing but pagerank boosting Tawker 07:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Megaplx 10:13, 19 February 2006 (UTC) The page was simply added for the information. It was not intended for "pagerank boosting." This is my first article, so I am open to suggestions for improving the article.
- Delete Per nomination. TVXPert 15:03, 19 February 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.
