Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Search Kindly

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. Insufficient coverage in reliable sources to have an article at this time.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 06:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Search Kindly

Search Kindly (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Previously deleted, mostly promotional article about an ad-driven search engine. Only external ref is a couple of words in a Wall St Journal piece reprinted in one of the subject's own blogs. Deiz talk 23:47, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

• Speedy delete as plain advertising. Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 00:16, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
• Don't delete I've tried to make this article as balanced as possible by including criticism of the website and a section on controversies. People are welcome to add more! In terms of references, I have now linked it directly to the Wall Street Journal website (I couldn't find it before) and have added other references to external websites, replaced those that lead to the Search Kindly blog. Elban91 (talk) 07:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

2 problems - the link to the WSJ is a subscription only page, with no mention of SK in the short blurb available without registration, plus there are no further reliable references which would establish notability per WP:CORP or WP:WEB. It's obviously a well written article, but there is still no evidence the subject is notable. Deiz talk 11:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - WP:WEB is pretty clear on this. We need multiple, independent, non-trivial, reliable sources. WSJ doesn't look non-trivial to me (or we'd see it named in the free blurb). Everything else has a blog-feel, or is associated with the subject. -- Mark Chovain 04:37, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
• Don't delete - Article seems like a possibility. Needs major rewriting though. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 13:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:WEB and WP:CORP trump "seems like a possibility". Deiz talk 16:39, 7 June 2008 (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.