Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Webopedia

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 - speculation about the motivation of the nominator doesn't matter when there are legitimate policy-reasons to argue for deletion. Those arguing for deletion, including the nominator, have done that, and the keep side hasn't come up with credible third party sources (not passing mentions) to refute them. Wikipedia is a website run by a non-profit entity, and speaking for myself I'm not being paid for this, so I'm not particularly concerned with 'conflicts of interest'. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 21:49, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Webopedia

Advertisement/promotional; fails WP:WEB - commercial web site promotion. Geomguy 16:30, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy keep Reasonably high Alexa ranking [1]; mainstream media mentions: [2],[3], [4]. Bad faith nomination; Note this comment on the Tech Dictionary AFD mentioning Webopedia; note that Geomguy (talk · contribs) was the creator of the Tech Dictionary article, and the only other keep vote for Tech Dictionary is from the anon IP that Geomguy started this from. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:54, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete If the criteria of a high alexa rank or mainstream media mention deserves a listing on wikipedia then online casino gambling web sites should also be considered for inclusion on Wikipedia. This page violates the policy that pages should not exist soley "to attract visitors to a web site" - this page provides no useful information other than directing someone to the Webopedia web site. Geomguy 17:14, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. An advertising-like tone for an article is not grounds for deletion, but for cleanup. — Dark Shikari ^talk/_contribs 13:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 12:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per Geomguy. Michael K. Edwards 14:30, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Association with Jupitermedia and media mentions push it past WP:WEB. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:00, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, bad faith or not. Ohnoitsjamie's links do not include any nontrivial coverage of the website, only mentions and links; they do not satisfy WP:WEB. Without such sources, the article would be impossible to clean up. Melchoir 22:24, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Not sure why "Association with Jupitermedia" has any bearing on this. This entry is an advertisement for webopedia.com - (bear with me I'm new at this) so I fail to see the value to wikipedia.JudyJohn 21:30, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep and cleanup I am unconvinced that this passes WP:WEB but I am worried about the possible conflict of interest: in some sense Webopedia is a "competitor" of Wikipedia. Pascal.Tesson 15:02, 23 October 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.