Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/10eastern (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. Jenks24 (talk) 08:45, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

10eastern
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A website that does not appear to be notable. It survived an AfD in 2006, mostly because of press coverage for the 'Found Photos' aspect that is not on the site any more. Mcewan (talk) 19:54, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Theopolisme   ( talk )  22:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 00:04, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 02:46, 6 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Seemingly run-of-the-mill website with no claim to multiple instances of substantial independent coverage. First deletion debate had limited participation and was based around the rationales "has a cult following" and "was the subject of a denial of service attack recently" and "I agree" — none of which should have held much water, policy-wise. Carrite (talk) 18:03, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note, there is one piece counting towards GNG in the footnotes, I'm more than willing to strike my error if anyone can produce a couple more pieces of substantial published coverage. Carrite (talk) 18:05, 6 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 03:09, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


 * A fourth relisting is unorthodox, but it would be nice to get a clean, meaningful result here one way or the other, given this is AFD number two. Courcelles 03:23, 13 March 2013 (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.