Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Know More Media, Inc.

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 was Delete. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-25 05:22Z

[edit] Know More Media, Inc.

Know More Media, Inc. (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Nominated for speedy deletion as blatant advertising, but I am going to give this the benefit of the doubt. Some references have been added that need some further review, so I'm bringing this to AfD. (consider me a neutral at this point, but AfD isn't a vote of course...) --W.marsh 00:53, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Weak Keep. Seems somewhat notable, has sources... --Nevhood 01:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom Veesicle (Talk) (Contribs) 03:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak delete Has two references from reliable sources, but pretty minor; very borderline. OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Rewrite, otherwise weak delete: While the subject is demonstrated to be notable and verifiable by the multiple references given, the Wikipedia content fails to describe said notability. I *think* it's notable for the business model of paying bloggers for quality content, but someone more expert than I should do the editing. A bit of NPOV work is needed. Finally, should the title include "Inc."? Alba 05:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete The references given are definitely ... gray. The Orange County Register article is certainly legitimate, but the other two are niche reporting services. // 3R1C 14:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Even if this business is notable, the prose is strongly promotional in tone in a way that suggests conflict of interest. If an article is made about this business, it will essentially have to be started from scratch. Not sure that this meets WP:WEB either, which ought to be relevant in that it is about a collection of blogs. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. This smacks of advertising to me, and it doesn't seem particularly notable. fraggle 16:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Notability comes to mind and the articles not wikfied, references all over the place and fails WP:WEB.TellyaddictEditor review! 17:44, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - I hunted around, and found little in the way of reliable sources outside of the business blogosphere, and even there I couldn't find much that looked notable enough to pass the required guidelines. Plus, it's definitely written in a marketing style. Tony Fox (arf!) 21:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:CITE  V60 VTalk · VDemolitions · Editor review 2! 23:49, 20 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.