Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adsnads

 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 Delete. Redwolf24 02:20, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Adsnads
Blatant advertising. Nobody LINKS to them according to Google, no Alexa rank. ral 315  15:04, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

They're new, so how can you expect an Alexa rank. Previous unsigned comment was by 66.32.71.124, who created Adsnads)


 * 'Delete. As of yet, nn. Sdedeo 15:12, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Can I ask your reason ?--A73 19:16, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. WP:ISNOT a Web directory. And do these chaps know what "nads" are in British English? Tonywalton | Talk 15:15, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep it. Of course, it is about an online community which offers users a means of advertising. In the interest of consistency, it is no different than Craigslist - the only difference is one has existed longer. Not to offend British users... read it as Ads 'n ads.
 * Delete - when it gets as popular as Craigslist, let them re-submit. --Outlander 15:47, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting it has to be popular to exist here --A73 19:16, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete, Wikipedia is not a web directory. Martg76 15:49, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * It is a collection of information organized by topic and much of it is about the internet. --A73 19:16, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete, Advertising Basil Fawlty 15:53, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I would argue that it is not advertising and not intended to be advertising, but describes something that deals in free advertising.--A73 19:16, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete, advertising for a (currently) non-notable web site -- Sliggy 16:29, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting advertising is OK if you deem it to be about a notable site ? --A73 19:16, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete, advertising. Dottore So 18:24, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep it, For those that think its advertising - take a look at any link that is about a commercial enterprise. They could all be called advertising. Do you think that anything commercial should not be on the web. Commerce and business on the web have made it successful. The power of the web and of sites like Wikipedia are rooted around inclusion, not exclusion. (Previous unsigned comment was by 66.32.71.124)
 * You're missing the point of what an encyclopaedia is. If your site was a sandwich bar that was being considered for deletion from the local directory of sandwich bars, you'd be absolutely correct in what you say. However Wikipedia is not a local (or international) directory; it is an encyclopaedia. Are you likely to find an entry for your site in Encyclopædia Britannica? No, because that's not a directory either. Might you find an entry for Xerox? Very probably; it's notable in a way in which with the best will in the world you cannot say your site is.
 * Note that an unwillingness to include your article in WP does not imply any unwillingness to see it succeed - best wishes for the success of your enterprise. Tonywalton  | Talk 11:21, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * According to the Wikipedia introduction "help make Wikipedia the best source of information on the Internet", and the current content, I can understand the difficulty in defining what it is. Certainly some are willing to assert what it isn't. Looking at Wikipedia as just an encyclopedia would eliminate much of what makes it special and unique. Inclusion is what makes Wikipedia special.--A73 14:55, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Keep it! The site provides community links that benefit a wide cross-section of the population. It isn't advertising but rather it fits the meaning/intent of an encyclopedia. -Julio

KEEP IT - Since when did wikipedia become such an elitist bunch of users? I think the website is a great portal for people to use.
 * 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.