Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NewsIsFree (2nd nomination)

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. Kurykh 05:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NewsIsFree

NewsIsFree (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Dead website, no notability, no attribution, not marked as being a stub EvanCarroll (talk) 19:41, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Reasons for deletoion:

• Article has no attribution, internal or otherwise.
• Article has no notability, stated or implicit.
• No sections or adherence to wikipedia MoS

Newsfree.com is a newsfeed directory and search engine started in 1999 by Mike Krus...

– Newsfree article

Simply not true, Newsfree.com is FindLinks, a yellow page spammer. Newsisfree.com exists, but at the very best that only says this spam has been sitting on wikipedia for over 3years, and hasn't even benefited the spammer. EvanCarroll (talk) 19:47, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

• Comment The website address looks like it accidentally got mangled in a cleanup by User:Tony Sidaway. I have now corrected it to indicate [www.newsisfree.com] rather than www.newsfree.com. I am not as certain as you are that this article is spam, perhaps you could further illuminate your theory? --NickPenguin_(contribs) 22:04, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

• Sure, doesn't belong here. WP:NOT we don't index the web, or care about every site. The site isn't special, the people that created it are nobodies. The article doesn't even make sense, a leading source of highly-targeted international information, moreover it is total WP:BULLSHIT for a website to syndicate in JavaScript. The fact that the website uses XML, or HTML. is rather stupid, as all websites use some variant of HTML. (probably XHTML which is XML/HTML). So the article fails technical merits, has peacock words like high demand, and fails social merits. And as you've stated, from June 2005, to December 2007, the article's LEAD sentence was factually incorrect ie, no one maintains this article. For a web company neither being historic, nor notable I see no reason for its inclusion. EvanCarroll (talk) 22:29, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete I don't see the need for a stub on a non-notable website. ~NeonFire372~ (talk) 12:58, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. NN. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Keilana^talk_(recall) 01:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

• Delete The nom is correct. The Website is non-existent so the company is no-more, and the article should be as well. The company might have been switched to findlinks.com. Ohmpandya (Talk) 02:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nomination. --Mhking (talk) 03:50, 31 December 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.