Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neocolours 2

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. Bratsche^talk 03:52, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neocolours

Moved from speedies. This was deleted in January 2005 - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neocolours

The text at that time was

http://www.neocolours.co.uk

A very fun website where you can see all the pet colours Neopets (http://www.neopets.com) have ever made. It also has a fun forum (http://www.neocolours.co.uk/forum)

The board has topped over 2,000 members, with some of the best including...well, check the memberlist.

In short, a great place to discuss Neopets, their new colours, and everything. ''

Clealy what we have now is substantially more than the old one, so speedy is not appropriate Tim | meep in my general direction 10:52, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete --Terence Ong 11:07, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as ad ComputerJoe 11:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Just seems useless J.J.Sagnella 13:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete- ad / doesn't meet WP:WEB —ERcheck @ 13:38, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete neocruft Ruby 14:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Don't delete please I found it useful while finding information about neopetsValerie 19:40, 11 February 2006
  • Comment Valerie,The site isn't getting deleted, just the article.J.J.Sagnella 08:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment What with the site crashing out from under us, it's also been useful to have the article to round up lost members - since it's one of the first results of a Google search. I realize that doesn't necessarily make it Wikipedia-worthy, however. Oogabooga 18:43, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Ad. AndyJones 15:56, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• Don't Delete I fail to see the point in deleting this article. The site was a legitimate one even it it is not currently valid. I know there are attempts to revive the site at: http://kamil.slashcity.com/nc/index.php thus this article could be updated with this information once everything is in order.
  • Comment Above user has only 2 edits and is an i.p. J.J.Sagnella 10:40, 16 February 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.