Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daily Recycler

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 00:06, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Daily Recycler

Site in question hasn't been updated since February 2005, nn Skrewler 05:38, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. nn. --Timecop 05:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. -- Femmina 06:04, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete nn blog. Dottore So 08:53, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
• Comment This is not a vote. Simply saying "non notable" is a waste of everyone's time. Instead, do a small amount of research, then provide the links. Like this: Google shows nothing notable, although it did make a list Vanity Fair... a long list. Alexa is almost two million, and Google news comes up empty. Thus, until evidence of notability provided, I recomend Delete. - brenneman^(t)(c) 10:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

I checked the article, I checked the blog, I looked it up on google and my conclusion is nn. Better? Dottore So 10:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, actually! Even better to provide the links, as you've done on another AfD where I've given you Wikilove. ^_^
brenneman^(t)(c) 11:14, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. nn -Incognito 12:53, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Per above. --Depakote 23:15, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
• Question: Can "Daily Recycler became a frequently linked source for the Drudge Report during the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election." be verified? If it was an important source in the Drudge Report, I think it deserves an article, despite being defunct now. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:36, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Not sure. This google query doesn't bring up anything, and neither does this one, or this one. Sounds bogus to me. --Timecop 05:05, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Also replying to myself, drudge report looks to be some kind of automated link-gathering site, so the chances of recycler being listed on it by automatic feed/news gathering are probably high. --Timecop 05:06, 19 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.