Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Singles


 * 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 ck lostsword•T•C 12:36, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

American Singles

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

no evidence of notability here. Creator claimed improvements coming, but that was 6 months ago, I think that should have been sufficient time if something was to come of this. Crossmr 01:27, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Appears to be non-notable with no attribution to reliable sources. The ubiquity of term "American singles" with respect to cheese and other items makes a google search unhelpful. -- Charlene 02:29, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. H  irohisatTalk Page 02:59, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable company, looks like it's been sold since anyhow.Capmango 05:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, numerous articles in WP:RS found via Google News Archive (using terms like "dating" or the site's owner "MatchNet" helps considerably). notoriety, even. One of four major dating sites chosen for a study by Cornell. Claims that the organization (not the website per se?) is the "largest" in the US. MatchNet almost went IPO in 2004, with AS one of its two important properties. In 2004, AS along with JDate ranked 2nd in the dating market. --Dhartung | Talk 05:35, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The first article is about a beating that happened to involve someone met on the site, the website isn't the focus of the article. The second its mentioned in passing, a trivial mention. Again not the focus of the article. The third is about the founder, not the website. The fourth is about the parent company at the time, not the website, the usa today link doesn't indicate whether AS was 2nd or 3rd, but given the order and match.com being listed first it would be second. However, again not the focus of the article. The last link shows that combined the two sites were second. Its individual performance isn't listed. The coverage is minor at best, and what dating site large or small hasn't had a few creeps on it? That hardly makes it notorious.--Crossmr 08:23, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 07:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete nn ¿SFGi Д nts!  ¿Complain! ¿Analyze! ¿Review! 02:18, 8 July 2007 (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.