Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gawker.com

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 speedy keep - apparent bad faith nomination, no arguments to delete. --Coredesat 06:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gawker.com

Gawker.com (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

From Talk:Gawker.com: Pathetic attempt to gain credibility, is every person whose worked on the Deaspin/Gawker online rages getting an article? User:Peakdetector

• Keep. Popular and influential web site, mentioned in numerous mainstream media outlets. PeteJayhawk 22:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Notable, documented in mass media, etc, etc. No reason whatsoever to delete this article. An admin needs to step in and explain to Peakdetector that starting pointless AFDs is disruptive and damaging to Wikipedia. LastChanceToBe
• speedy keep as with Deadspin and Will Leitch, this page belongs. Smmurphy^(Talk) 22:38, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy keep, obviously. What is going on with this editor? Natalie 02:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, influential and notable blog. Wooyi 03:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy keep. No reason given for nomination; block nominator per other comments. Daniel Case 05:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy keep, bad faith nom. hateless 05:51, 1 February 2007 (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.