Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Move.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 of the debate was delete. --Ixfd64 08:56, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Move.com

Reads like advertising, and tags indicating such have been removed several times now. I'm not sure it's of enough substance, considering WP:WEB or WP:CORP to be keepable. I leave it to discussion. Tony Fox (speak) 01:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep and cleanup I found several non-trivial publications on the company (Which is publicly traded (NASDAQ:MOVE). [1][2]It seems to be the world's first comprehensive real-estate search. Whether thats true or just advertising nonsense, I don't know. AdamBiswanger1 01:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and relocate to the void; this is outrageous advertising. --die Baumfabrik 02:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete with extreme prejudice. TheRingess 02:53, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete or rewrite and lock. We have to find a way to block the advertisement. Pascal.Tesson 03:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Extra note: creator of page Special:Contributions/Frankjohnson999 is a repeat spammer. Pascal.Tesson 03:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Extra extra note: the user has also created and maintained the article Cfares which I just tagged for notability but if someone can check it out, it might also be suitable for AfD. Pascal.Tesson 03:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I was wondering about that. Tony Fox (speak) 04:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:WEB and WP:ADS. Alexa ranking of 9,004 [3]--TBCTaLk?!? 03:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, fails WP:WEB, advertisement. --Coredesat talk 08:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete no evidence that they pass WP:CORP or WP:WEB. Kevin 08:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

  I don't understand how being listed on NASDAQ isn't a fulfilment of the second criterion of WP:CORP. Did you actually read it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adambiswanger1 (talk • contribs)

Yes I did. It states (in part) is listed on ranking indices i.e. the Fortune 500 or Forbes 500. Just being on NASDAQ is not enough. Kevin 09:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - Ad., <200 google results, fails WP:WEB --WinHunter ^(talk) 11:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
  • OK, OK. I could be missing something, but in my first comment I have stated that this company passes both WP:WEB and WP:CORP, and no one seems to have addressed this. For one, the company, Move Inc, is traded on NASDAQ (that's a pretty big deal). WP:CORP says "The company or corporation is listed on ranking indices of important companies produced by well-known and independent publications". Now mind you that I'll work to fix it up so that it is not so spammy. Now as far as passing WP:WEB, my case isn't as strong, but I have two websites above that mention the site independently. Please address the issues I have raised before simply voting "delete". AdamBiswanger1 11:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment The parent company Move is indeed listed on the NASDAQ but that does not suffice for keep especially sice the article is clearly targeted at listing the services offered by the company. See the relevant section on WP:CORP. This is also my reasonning for having the page protected against future spam if the AfD result is to keep. Pascal.Tesson 12:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment Undoubtedly Move, Inc deserves its own article, but for whatever reason it does not have one. The company's primary manifestation is its website, just like Yahoo! and Google. So, I was thinking of this article as a page for Move, inc. In any event, this article isn't terribly important so I'm gonna throw in the towel. AdamBiswanger1 13:08, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment Reread the guidelines. "The company or corporation is listed on ranking indices..." Being listed on NASDAQ is not notable, nor is it a "big deal"; thousands of companies are. Being one of the major companies used to calculate the index (the NASDAQ 100) would be. Fan1967 13:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, unless someone wants to do major editing to the piece. Universitytruth 21:57, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete adcruft ---CH 05:00, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete this vanispamcruftisement. Just zis Guy you know? 11:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I don't normally like to pile on votes when a concencus is obvious but this article is absoloutely horrible. Viridae^Talk 14:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Being listed in NASDAQ is not enough. Being listed doesn't mean "used to calculate stock market indices" -- that's the NASDAQ-100, which is composed of NASDAQ's larger and more reliable companies. By the way, someone should really finish List of companies listed on NASDAQ.--M@rēino 21:46, 29 June 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.