Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SooToday.com

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was KEEP. -Splash 16:10, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] SooToday.com

Alexa ranking is around 81,000. WP:NOT a web directory. Joel7687 00:46, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Also note Sootoday.com, which was nominated for a separate VfD vote a few days ago and had a speedy consensus (it was a one-liner), but has now been redirected to this. Whatever consensus is reached on this vote should stand for the redirect as well. Bearcat

• Actually, to be honest, the site is significant beyond its Alexa rank; it was one of the first local news websites in Canada to emerge as a response to CTV's local news cutbacks (see MCTV). Said cutbacks were one of the most intensely controversial concentration of media ownership issues in Canadian history, which reminds me that I've been meaning to add a section on Canadian media to that article for ages now. Fark also seems to have taken a liking to the site; posts there have linked back to SooToday several times (more than any other Canadian newspaper that I'm aware of, actually.) I've done some initial cleanup on it which makes its notability a bit clearer, so I guess I'm on the keep side. Bearcat 01:49, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
• As someone with a personal history in the area, I can confirm this as notable. Keep. CJCurrie 02:00, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as per Bearcat. DoubleBlue (Talk) 02:14, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
• I know I'm the one who nominated it, but since I never actually typed the word "Delete," I'm going to vote Keep. The Alexa ranking isn't all that bad, I wasn't aware of the information Bearcat presented, and the article looks a lot nicer now. At least this VfD resulted in improvement of the article. --Joel7687 03:04, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
  • No worries...you couldn't have known. (As written, the article really wasn't making its notability very clear.) Bearcat 03:14, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keeps as above. DavidH 04:30, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep after re-write. Nice Work!. Hamster Sandwich 04:38, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - per rewrite. FCYTravis 17:39, 7 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.