Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artnear


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 11:14, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Artnear

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Notability. Advert. Haruth (talk) 01:36, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

See also related advert / article at Hopnear. --Haruth (talk) 01:41, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Miguel.mateo (talk) 12:30, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:13, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Not an advert in my opinion. I added the article(s) after finding many pages on other apps, both that I use and others that I do not and which seem inconsequential. It seems to me the bar has been set. See for example: By these standards I would argue to keep artnear. The media coverage of artnear includes the following:
 * List of iPhone Apps
 * Mars Hill Church iPhone App
 * | Bad at sports
 * | O'Reilly
 * | Artnewsblog
 * | Artinfo
 * Artjetset
 * and of course, | NYT App of the Week

By these standards it could be appropriate to kill hopnear. Bombaybeauty 018:40, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per Haruth. --Nuujinn (talk) 18:50, 3 April 2010 (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.