Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cricket Online

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 delete. Mailer Diablo 19:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cricket Online

I see nothing notable about this website at all. It's Alexa ranking is just short of 900,000 meaning almost a million more sites get more traffic than it. If anyone can cite a single notable feature I'd like to hear it, as I most certainly cannot see one - Glen 16:55, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment - it seems the creator of this article (60.224.56.109) also created the now deleted vanity article Thomas Rose - the owner of cricket-online.com. As such I would safely assume the creator is the owner and this article should likely follow the same path... - Glen 17:05, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. per WP:WEB: Self-promotion and product placement are not the routes to having an encyclopaedia article. The published works must be someone else writing about the company, corporation, product, or service. Fails criteria 1,2&3. Retention would set a bad precedent. -- I@n ≡ talk 05:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 20:34, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete: Advertising copy. It's all about click throughs and not about an entity that requires explanation (and how obscure would a site called that be, anyway?). Geogre 02:39, 26 July 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.