Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AskJolene


 * 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. Alexa rank has not been a part of WP:WEB for a long time, with good reason. Verifiable information is what we're after. W.marsh 17:56, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

AskJolene
Not a notable website per WP:WEB and unlikely to be expanded. Uncle Bungle 04:23, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Submitted without comment: With a rather remarkable Alexa rank of 860, and it's the top-ranked adult search engine. (The Sex List, which ranks second, has an overall rank of 52,001. --Dhartung | Talk 04:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Further: Several results about a minor kerfuffle regarding BMW, and there seem to be some Dutch results out there if you search on the CEO, Toine Verheul . --Dhartung | Talk 05:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, even with the Alexa rank, I think it isn't really notable. What is there really to say about adult search engines? J I P  | Talk 06:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Not really notable, is it "searchenginecruft"? --SunStar Net 10:34, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep, based on the results Dhartung came up with.--Prosfilaes 12:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * keep Clearly room for encyclopedic content about this. Un  focused  15:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. -- Kf4bdy talk contribs 17:02, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete Stronger evidence of encyclopedic notability needed to take this beyond web directory content. Also, Alexa rating is not totally reliable and is also vulnerable to manipulation. As this is a porn search engine company, they would be especially adept at spam-like tactics. But its doing well compared to Sex List, I'm willing to accept the Alexa result if something more encyclopedic can be produced and authoritatively verified Bwithh 17:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep based on Alexa, but it needs to be expanded considerably. 23skidoo 18:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment May be a fairly notable porn search engine, but there really isn't much room for expansion. I mean, what can you say about a site like this? When you type in "lesbian threesomes" it returns you a list of sites with lesbian threesomes. Duh. Fan-1967 18:59, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * How about ownership and traffic details? How about information about the infrastructure that runs the site?  It seems we have more than enough information about other search engines to make articles about them.  This is clearly a topic for an article, so someone wrote a completely appropriate stub. It may remain a stub for a while, but that in itself isn't harmful in any way.   Un  focused  19:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * comment One can describe the traffic and infrastructure of any website on the internet, it doesn't make it notable. --Uncle Bungle 06:17, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * 1. Notable is a guideline, not a policy.  2.  See Alexa rank.  3. Top site in its class.   Un  focused  15:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Note that Alexa rank sufferes from some some statistical bias. The site hasn't done anything to "stand up and be counted". --Uncle Bungle 19:25, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you mean or why it matters. Are you suggesting that only websites that have done something important in this world are notable enough for wikipedia? I'm not sure you really have a firm grasp of what you are actually talking about.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 01:18, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete per WP:WEB. Cbrown1023 21:34, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, I created the stub as a peripheral matter to another article, I really don't konw anything about the site but the fact that so many people use it seems to indicate that it at least is notable enough for a wikipedia article.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 00:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete useless article --Nielswik(talk) 04:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per Alexa rank, which has now even improved to 846. Since the article started less than two weeks ago, I don't see why it couldn't be expanded. Prolog 14:45, 8 November 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.